FOREWORD
It is a privilege to present this monumental work on Sikh religion and history, completed with the co-
operation of a galaxy of distinguished scholars. The project was undertaken about two years ago at the
instance of Justice Choor Singh of Singapore, by Sardar Daljeet Singh and Dr Kharak Singh in behalf of the
Institute of Sikh Studies, Chandigarh. The project suffered a serious setback due to the unfortunate demise
of Sardar Daljeet Singh in October 1994, after which the burden fell largely on Dr Kharak Singh.
The need for a single volume dealing with the salient features of Sikhism and its history had long
been felt. This book, it is hoped, will fulfill this need adequately. It explains the cardinal principles of the
Sikh religion, and surveys its history. It also deals with common misunderstandings or misrepresentation
about Sikhs and Sikhism in world books and other media. In fact, this book is a mini-encyclopaedia and
could be called ‘all about Sikhism’. I wish to record my sincere appreciation of the hard work put in by the
editors and the contributions made by various authors.
In behalf of the Institute of Sikh Studies, I am happy to present this book to readers, Sikhs as well an
non-Sikhs, in the hope that it will not only lead to an appreciation of the tremendous contribution of Sikhism
to teligious thought, but also promote understanding among various faiths, essential for universal
brotherhood of mankind.
November 12, 1996 Dr. Kuldip Singh
President
Instititute of Sikh Studies
Chandigarh
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
PREFACE
Sikhism, founded in the fifteenth century by Guru Nanak Dev, is the youngest and the latest among
world religions. With its emphasis on a single loving God, Who created the universe, and Who is the ‘Father
of us all’; Sikhism seeks to knit the entire mankind into one universal brotherhood. The Guru preached love,
justice and equality, and condemned discrimination and exploitation — religious, social or political. God is the
‘Ocean of Virtues.’ The Sikhs or followers of the Guru are enjoined to imbibe these virtues without which no
salvation is possible. God runs the universe with ‘His Will’ which is altruistic. A Sikh must understand His
Will and carry it out to bring about the kingdom of God on earth. Sikhism is not a religion of passive
spectators. It advocates active participation in the process of human evolution to superman.
Sikhism is a religion with a message of hope and optimism. It does not regard this world as a place of
suffering, and human birth as a punishment. Rather, it is an opportunity given by God in His Infinite mercy,
to practise righteousness and to realise one’s destiny.
The brief history of Sikhism is a story if an inexorable battle in the cause of righteousness. During
the last five centuries, the dauntless spirit of Sikhism has flourished in ups as well as downs. As early as the
beginning of the eighteenth century the downtrodden people of North India, who had been subjected to
inhuman treatment and exploitation by religious hierarchy and marauded by alien invaders for centuries, had
succeeded in establishing their own empire in the entire North — West of the sub-continent of India. The
Sikh Rule under Maharaja Ranjit Singh provided a model of governance. It is a remarkable and unique fact of
history that during the half century of his rule, the Maharaja did not award death penalty to anyone, not even
to those who had made attempts on his own life. Such was the benevolence of the Sikh rule. Unfortunately,
the Sikhs lost their hard-earned self-rule. But the crusade for justice and equality continues and will continue.
This is the way of life in Sikhism.
Since the beginning of the 20" century, Sikhs started migrating out of India, and due to their
cosmopolitan nature and adventuresome spirit, they are today inhabiting virtually every corner of the world.
They have stuck to their values as well as their external identity marked by full beard, unshorn hair and
turban. They have no problem in maintaining this outward identity and fit into all societies, carrying with
them the Guru’s motto, ‘No one is our enemy, nor is anyone a stranger. With all are we in accord.’
Their distinct appearance attracts attention and curiosity outside India. People want to know more
about Sikhs and to understand their philosophy. The information about Sikhs and Sikhism, available in world
books, is sketchy and often misleading. Coupled with that is the reality of some agencies deliberately
indulging in misrepresentation of this great faith, which holds every promise of being a future religion of the
world. In this situation, the need for a book explaining the origin and doctrines of Sikhism as well as the
history of its followers, was keenly felt. It was in early 1994 that Justice Choor Singh of Singapore took the
initiative for the project leading to the present volume. Besides initiative and inspiration, Justice Choor Singh
organised the required financial support and has also contributed the Introductory chapter, which is no less
than summary of the book.
The book is divided into five sections. Section I deals with Sikh Ideology in which major doctrines of
Sikhism are discussed. Sikhism is presented as a revealed religion, and a whole-life, independent, spiritual and
socio-religious system, distinct from earlier Indian or other world traditions. For the sake of comparison, the
eatlier Indian traditions like Nathism, Vaisnavism and The Radical Bhagats, with which Sikhismis often
erroneously confused, are discussed in Section I, to bring out the distinctive features of Sikhism. Section HI
deals with major institutions, while Section IV is a brief survey of Sikh history. The Gurus’ period as well as
other crucial periods in the history of Sikhs are breifly covered by authorities on the respective periods.
Finally, Section V has been added to enlighten the readers on some controversies regarding Sikhs and
Sikhism that have surfaced in recent times. This is also necessary in view of the spate of misinformation let
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
loose by certain groups with ulterior motives of damaging the image of Sikhs and Sikhism among the world
Community.
We have tried to give as complete a picture of Sikhs and Sikhism as possible in a single volume. We
are aware of the gaps left, as also of some overlapping which is inevitable in an effort involving such a large
number of authors. But the very fact that so many eminent scholars have joined in lends a rare degree of
importance to the work. I am sure that those who want to understand Sikhism and its colourful followers,
will find the book extremely helpful.
It is my pleasant duty to express my gratitude to all those who have joined in this effort to produce
this book. First among them is Justice Choor Singh who initiated the move, and as reported earlier, also
organised the financial support, We are equally indebted to the Sikh Community of Singapore, who liberally
contributed towards the project, represented by the following organisations:
CENTRAL SIKH GURDWARA BOARD
SINGAPORE SIKH EDUCATION FOUNDATION
BHAI MAHARAJ SINGH MEMORIAL SHRINE
SIKH WELFARE COUNCIL
SRI GURU NANAK SAT SANG SABHA
SRI GURU SINGH SABHA
SINGAPORE KHALSA ASSOCIATION
KHALSA DHARMAK SABHA
PARDESI KHALSA DHARMAK DEWAN
GURDWARA SAHIB YISHUN
ISTRI SAT SANG SABHAS
SIKH SEWAKS OF SINGAPORE
SIKH MISSIONARY SOCIETY, SINGAPORE
SIKH MONEYLENDERS ASSOCIATION
We ate highly indebted to all the authors who have contributed various chapters to this volume.
Since it is a co-operative effort, the book would have been incomplete without contribution of any one of
them. In fact, the joining together of so many highly respected scholars, lends the book an authority,
otherwise impossible. Special thanks are due to Sardar Tharam Singh, who besides contributing two valuable
chapters, took keen interest in the publication throughout, and rendered invaluable assistance in editorial
work. Here, I must also acknowledge the help received from Col. Amrik Singh Khaira and Sardar G.S. Sethi
in going through the proofs and in the form of valuable suggestions. Dr. Hazara Singh, Adviser, Publication
Bureau, Punjabi University, Patiala deserves special thanks for his interest in the project and for his valuable
assistance in production of the book.
In the end, I must record my sincerest thanks to Dr. Birendra Kaur and Ms Sumit Kaur who have
gone over the proofs time and again in order to eliminate errors, and to Mr. Akashdeep who laser-typeset the
manuscript with a rare degree of patience, high professional efficiency and uncommon devotion.
959, Sector 59, SAS Nagar, KHARAK SINGH
Chandigarh, India — 160059.
November 12, 1996
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
CONTENTS
FOREWORD ee Kuldip Singh v
PREFACK 202 Kharak Singh vil
INTRODUCTION Choor Singh xiti
I, IDEOLOGY
1. AMETHOD TOSTUDY RELIGION —_d”_=t... Daljeet Singh 3
2. PROBLEMS OF METHODOLOGY —_—i—*==.. i 11
3. SIKHISM:BASICELEMENTS aes 2 20
4. NAAMINSIKHISM ss 8 37
5. SIKH THEORY OF EVOLUTION: HAUMAIN ...... 57
AND PROBLEM OF HERMENUTICS
6. THESIKH THOUGHT ——— an Kapur Singh 85
7. THESIKH WORLDVIEW a Daljeet Singh 99
8. SIXHISM: AMIRLPIRISYSTEM ans Kharak Singh 120
9. POLITICAL IDEAS OF GURU NANAK... Gurtej Singh 164
10. SAINT-SSOLDIER aa Kharak Singh 173
11. SIKHISM:AN ORIGINAL, DISTINCT, nun. H. S. Shan 183
REVEALED AND COMPLETE RELIGION
12, SIKH IDENTITY AND CONTINUITY— —__...... Abtar Singh 212
A PERSPECTIVE FROM ETHICS
13. THESIKHPANTH— —— an, Jagjit Singh 220
II. SIKHISM AND EARLIER INDIAN TRADITIONS
14, NATHISM nn, Daljeet Singh 233
15. VAISNAVISM a 249
16. THERADICALBHAGATS naan " 270
If, INSTITUTIONS
17. THEKHALISA an, Jagjit Singh 289
18. MARTYRDOMINSIKHISM nau Kharak Singh 303
19. SIKH RAHIT MARYADA AND SIKH SYMBOLS ...... G. S. Mansukhani 312
20. THECASTESYSTEM AND SIKHS ——i”t=t... Jagjit Singh 324
21. GURU GRANTH SAHIB— au Harbans Singh 340
GURU ETERNAL FOR SIKHS
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
31,
32.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary
IV. SIKH HISTORY
. THE GURUS LIVE THEIR IDEOLOGY ___...... Datjeet Singh
. GURU GOBIND SINGH: H. R. Gupta
CREATION OF THE KHALSA
GURU GOBIND SINGH DESIGNATES... Ganda Singh
SRI GRANTH SAHIB TO BE GURU
. BANDA SINGH BAHADUR ann Tharam Singh
. SIKH STRUGGLE AFTER BANDA an.
. SIKH RULE AND RANJITSINGH an. G. S. Dhillon
. ANGLO-SIKH WARS 0 Karnail Singh
. SINGH SABHA MOVEMENT— aa. G. S. Dhillon
A REVIVAL
. SISHS AND THE BRITISH nn i
V. CONTROVERSIES
FUNDAMENTALISM, MODERNITY AND __...... Noel Q. King
SIKHISM : A TERTIUM QUID
MISREPRESENTATION OF SUKH TRADITION ...... James R. Lewis
IN WORLD RELIGIOUS TEXTBOOKS
. MISREPRESENTATION OF SUIKHISM a... Kharak Singh
IN WESTERN ENCYCLOPEDIAS
THE PUNJAB PROBLEM AND a.
FUNDAMENTALISM
. SIKH MILITANCY AND THEJATS a. Jagit Singh
. SIKHISM AND TEMPORAL AUTHORITY Kharak Singh
. AUTHENTICITY OF KARTARPURI BIR a... Datjeet Singh
. GURUS AND THEBANI 2 Datjeet Singh C
Kharak Singh
. TWO VIEWS ON DASAMGRANTH a. Gurtej Singh
. DASAM GRANTH —ITSHISTORY a. Datjeet Singh
OUR CONTRIBUTORS
GLOSSARY
355
385
406
424
”
482
502
545
565
607
612
621
640
659
672
681
696
704
710
123
725
448
NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
INTRODUCTION
Who are the Sikhs? And what is Sikhism? It is not possible to understand the Sikhs or appreciate
their religion, Sikhism, without studying their history and the circumstances under which Sikhism was born.
BIRTH OF SIKHISM
To answer the above questions, we must go back to the times of Guru Nanak Dev (1469 to 1539),
the founder of the Sikh religion. Sikhism began with the preaching of Guru Nanak. He based his teachings
on his personal experience of a hukam (command) received directly from God. Guru Nanak’s simple
monotheistic creed, supported by a set of humanitarian principles of conduct, and presented with humility
and conviction, made a deep impact on the Indian population, then suffering under the heavy heel of the
Mughal conquerors and the ritualised Hindu religious observances. Guru Nanak won a large number of
adherents to his teachings. It was the beginning of a new religious fellowship, which, in course of time,
developed into a well-defined new faith. Its chief doctrines were the unity of God, the brotherhood of man,
rejection of caste, and the futility of rituals like idol-worship. Guru Nanak is, in fact, the revealer of a new
gospel, the founder of a new faith, the perfect example of piety and deep devotion.
The new religion founded by Guru Nanak was nurtured by nine other Gurus who succeeded him
in the holy office of Guruship in the following order :
1. Guru Nanak Dev 1469-1539 A.D.
2. Guru Angad Dev 1539-1552 A.D.
3. Guru Amar Das 1552-1574 A.D.
4, Guru Ram Das 1574-1581 A.D.
5. Guru Arjun Dev 1581-1606 A.D.
6. Guru Hargobind 1606-1644 A.D.
7. Guru Har Rai 1644-1661 A.D.
8. Guru Har Krishan 1661-1664 A.D.
9. Guru Tegh Bahadur 1664-1675 A.D.
10. Guru Gobind Singh1675-1708 A.D.
The term “Guru” when applied to Guru Nanak and his nine successors means spiritual
Enlightener. Thus, a Guru in this sense is one who delivers those who accept his teachings and discipline
from darkness of materialistic illusion to spiritual enlightenment, from samsara, the cycle of rebirth, to the
supreme spiritual bliss of union with God.
The term Guru in the Hindu tradition means a spiritual guide and instructor. In the Sikh
scripture, however, the term Guru is often used by the Sikh Gurus and others in this sense as well as for God
Himself. The role of the Sikh Gurus, however, was different from that of the Hindu gurus : instead of
imparting knowledge of God based on the existing scriptures, they acted as revealers of truth, that is,
knowledge of God. Their revelations formed the basis of Sikhism, and the Sikh Gurus became its founders.
The Sikh Gurus did not claim to be incarnations of God, or God in human form. Sikhism does not believe
in the theory of incarnation, because God does not take birth.
The Guru is a messenger of God sent to enlighten mankind. He is one who has realised God.
Blessed by Divine Grace, he becomes perfect and capable of guiding mortals on the path to God. The
disciple has to reflect on the Guru’s teachings, be convinced of its truth in his mind, practise it in thought,
word and deed, and pray for Divine Grace. He then obtains liberation from the cycle of birth and death
while living a normal life. The Guru teaches the disciple how to link his own consciousness to Divine
Consciousness. He makes the disciple see the vision of God within his own heart. The Sikh Gurus were
otdinary human beings, but when they were blessed by Divine Grace, they became perfect and capable of
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
guiding mortals on the spiritual path. The Sikh Gurus were treated with great reverence and people turned to
them for instruction because of their wisdom and their moral piety.
Guru Nanak preached his new gospel in dharamsalas. In ancient times, dharamsalas were hostels for
pilgrims. Guru Nanak’s dharamsalas were different. Here his followers gathered to listen to his discourses on
the new faith preached by him and to sing hymns taught by him. Dsaramsalas played a very significant role in
shaping and governing the life of the Sikhs. The first few dharamsalas were established by Guru Nanak Dev as
centres of the new society with a new religious movement. More dharamsalas were created by the other Gurus
who succeeded him and later on by Sikhs. These have been a source of strength and inspiration to the Sikhs,
and have helped in maintaining the corporate life of the community. Guru Nanak Dev gave concrete
expression to the ideas of unity, equality and fraternity by holding at these centres community prayers and
community /angars (meals from the community kitchen). In the words of Bhai Gurdas, “dharamsala is like
Mansarovar (a sacred lake in the Himalayas) and the Sikhs flock there like swans.” The great message of
emancipation from invidious distinctions and caste prejudices was instilled into the hearts of the people,
through these institutions of sangat (congregation assembled for worship) and pangat (line of devotees seated
on the floor for a meal from the community kitchen), originally established at these centres.
Guru Nanak started the institutions of dharamsala, sangat, langar and manjis (seats of preaching). The
succeeding Gurus further consolidated and extended these institutions. Guru Amar Das systematized the
institution of manjis and selected twenty-two centres for this mission. Persons of high religious calibre were
nominated to these offices. They were in charge of the Guru’s followers in an area and catered to their
religious as well as temporal needs. They were the links of the organisation and the twenty-two channels of
communication between the Guru and the sangat. They collected the offerings and passed the same on to the
central treasury where they were used by the Guru for the purposes of the mission. Guru Arjun further
regularised the collection of these contributions. He fixed the amount to be one tenth of one’s income that
every Sikh should set apart for the common cause.
The dharamsalas of the Sikhs not only helped to spread the gospel of the Gurus, but also served as
meeting places for discussion of general problems concerning the welfare of the Sikh Panth and as training
grounds for social service. Although there were then numerous Sikh dbaramsalas all over the Punjab, he felt
that there should be a central Sikh shrine to meet the growing needs of the Sikh sangats, where they could
gather to celebrate jointly all Sikh religious festivals. Accordingly, he built Harimandar Sahib, the most sacred
shrine of Sikhs, which has served as the heart of the Sikh faith and has played a crucial role in the
consolidation of the Sikh Panth.
Guru Arjun Dev compiled Guru Granth Sahib, the sacred scripture of the Sikhs, consisting of the
hymns of the Gurus and other saints. Guru Arjun Dev felt that there should be one Religious Book as the
scripture and one central place —- Harimandar Sahib — to be the rendezvous for the new religion and he
accomplished both for the further development of the new faith.
Written in Gurmukhi script, Guru Granth Sahib became the nucleus of the Sikh way of life and of
all religious observances of the Sikhs. The Gurbani, containing spiritual knowledge, became the object of the
highest reverence for the Sikhs, as well as for the Gurus themselves. The word of Guru Granth Sahib is
equated with the Guru himself. “The Gurbani is the Guru, and the Guru the Gurbani” sang Guru Ram Das.
On August 16, 1604 A. D. Guru Arjun ceremoniously installed the sacred volume of Guru Granth Sahib in
the centre of the inner sanctorum in the newly-built Harimandar Sahib. The high level of sanctity and
reverence accorded to the Harimandar could not have been possible without Guru Granth Sahib enshrined in
it.
Guru Arjun Dev, the compiler of Guru Granth Sahib, has very clearly and emphatically declared
the independent position of Sikhism vis-a-vis Hinduism or any other religion :
“T do not keep the Hindu fast nor the Muslim Ramadan;
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
I serve Him alone who is my refuge
IT serve the One Master; who is also Allah
I have broken with the Hindu and the Muslim,
I do not worship the Hindu way nor like the Mush go to Mecca,
IT serve Him alone and no other,
I will not pray to idols nor say the Muslim prayer
I shall put my heart at the feet of the one Supreme Being
For, we are neither Hindus nor Mussalmans.” (A. G. 1136)
With such an authoritative statement, from the pen of the compiler Guru of the sacred scripture of
the Sikhs, it is not understood how non-Sikhs can keep asserting persistently that Sikhism is a sect of
Hinduism.
Copies of Guru Granth Sahib were made, and in due course, installed in all dharamsalas. With the
installation of Guru Granth Sahib in a dharamsala, it became a gurdwara (Abode of the Guru), and more so
after Guru Gobind Singh, the tenth and last living Guru of the Sikhs, conferred Guruship on it. He ordained
that after him, Guru Granth Sahib shall be the Guru of the Sikhs. He installed Guru Granth Sahib as his
successor, thus putting an end to the line of living Gurus. After the conferment of Guruship on the Granth
Sahib, it began to be addressed as Guru Granth Sahib. Guru Gobind Singh thus gave the institution of
Guruship a permanent and abiding character by vesting in it the immortality of Guru Granth Sahib and in the
continuity of the Khalsa Panth (Brotherhood of the Pure). It is of course not the book but its contents, the
Gurshabad (the Divine Word) which is now the perpetual Guru of the Sikhs and shall remain ever so, for there
is no longer any place in the Sikh faith for a new living Guru. It is for this reason that any attack on a
gurdwara is considered by the Sikhs as an attack on their Guru, and a Sikh will not hesitate to lay down his
life in defence of his gurdwara. A great part of Sikh history revolves around gurdwaras. In the daily Sikh
prayer, an eloquent reference is made to the brave Sikhs who suffered martyrdom in protecting their
gurdwaras. “The freedom of their gurdwaras has always been the measure of the Sikhs’ freedom or
prosperity’, writes Teja Singh in Essays on Sikhism.
The gurdwara emerged as a new edifice on the Indian religious scene in the seventeenth century.
Since then, this indestructible symbol of the Sikh faith has aroused intense and indefinable feelings in millions
of Sikhs everywhere, as well as a longing to hear recitations from Guru Granth Sahib and the shabads (hymns)
rendered in the robust and resonant voices of the rags (hymn singers).
After the martyrdom of Guru Arjun Dev, his son Guru Hargobind took the seat of his father with
two swords girded round his waist, one symbolising spiritual power and the other temporal authority. Seeing
how peaceful resistance to oppression had proved abortive, he recognised recourse to the sword as a rightful
alternative for self-defence. Opposite the Harimandar, he built the Akal Takht (The Throne of the Timeless
God). In it, he sat on a throne and held court. He received envoys, settled disputes and administered justice.
Ever since then, the Akal Takht has remained the seat of the spiritual and temporal authority of the Sikhs.
During the eighteenth century, when, as a result of severe persecution, the Sikhs were forced to seek refuge in
forests, it served as a rallying point. The meetings of the Sarbat Khalsa (a general meeting of all the Sikhs),
were held here, usually on the Vaisakhi and Diwali festival days. It was from the Akal Takht, that the affairs
of the Sikh community, thereafter began to be administered. The Akal Takht has ever since served as the
supreme court of the Sikh faith. The Supreme spiritual and temporal authority of the Sikhs is enshrined in
the Akal Takht. The importance of the Akal Takht to the Sikhs is hard to describe and impossible to
exaggerate. It is also known as the Aka/ Bunga (Lord’s Mansion).
The period of Guru Nanak’s ministry was marked by the education and enlightenment of the
people. Guru Nanak broke the first sod and cleared the ground for the building of the national character of
the Sikhs. It was reserved for his successors to give them the lessons in obedience, service, self-sacrifice and
other noble virtues. The final touch of perfection was given by the last prophet, Guru Gobind Singh, who,
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
by founding the Khalsa Panth, completed the transformation of the Sikhs into a saint-soldier martial race
imbued with spiritual qualities and with a distinct identity, which in time became a nation of warriors and
conquered the whole of North India.
SIKH SCRIPTURE
The scripture of the Sikhs is contained in a volume of 1430 pages called Guru Granth Sahib. It
contains a collection of the writings of their Gurus and some other Dhagats (saints). Guru Granth Sahib
contains the compositions of the first five Gurus, Guru Nanak Dev, Guru Angad, Guru Amar Das, Guru
Ram Das, Guru Arjun Dev, and of Guru Tegh Bahadur (the ninth Guru), panegyrics of bards who attended
on the Gurus and admired their character, besides hymns of medieval Indian Hindu and Muslim saints. The
cardinal principle of the Gurus and bhagats whose writings find a place in the sacred book of the Sikhs, is the
unity of God. This is inculcated everywhere in the Sikh sacred writings with ample and perhaps not
unnecessary iteration, considering the forces, Sikhism had to contend with, in an age of ignorance and
superstition.
Both the Gurus and Guru Granth Sahib inspire the reverence which they are accorded because of
the Gurbani which they express, the word of Divine truth. Guru Arjun, the fifth Guru who compiled Guru
Granth Sahib bowed before the collection which he had compiled and installed it in the newly built Darbar
Sahib (Golden Temple) in 1604. In doing so, he was acknowledging the higher authority of Gurbani over his
personal status as Guru.
The great Pandits and Brahmins of Hindustan communicated their instructions in Sanskrit, which
they deemed as the language of the gods. The Gurus thought it would be of more general advantage to
present their message in the local language of their age. When Guru Amar Das was asked the treason for this,
he replied : “Well-water can only irrigate the adjacent land, but rain-water the whole world.” On this account,
the Gurus composed their hymns in the language of the people, and enshrined these in the Gurmukhi script,
so that men and women of all castes and classes may read and understand it.
Contrary to the practice of the ancient Indian ascetics, the Gurus held that man can obtain eternal
happiness without forsaking his ordinary worldly duties. All the Gurus and the bhagats whose writings find
place in Guru Granth Sahib, emphasise that union with the Absolute should be the supreme object of man’s
devotion and aspirations. Merger in God is completely foreign to Sikh theology. Union or link with God but
not merger is aspired, for merger involves loss of identity and can be possible only in a pantheistic creed and
not in a theistic creed like Sikhism. In Sikhism, the goal of only personal salvation is excluded. God-centred
activity in one’s life and not salvation is the goal.
The Gurus emphasised the idea that God resides within the human heart and that the way to solve
our problems and difficulties is to establish a relationship with Him. The presence of God in us has variously
been described as Naam, Guru, Word, Light and Will. Naam is the Dynamic and Attributive Immanence of
God, representing His Hukm, Raza or Will. In short, Naam is the essence of God. The goal in life for a Sikh
is to link himself with Naam. Love, contentment, truth, humility and other virtues enable the seed of Naam to
sprout. Our deeds alone bear witness unto our life. It is only the virtuous and altruistic deeds that lead one
away from the life of baumein (self-exaltation, self-centredness) and towards the path of Naam or God-
centredness.
In Guru Granth Sahib, through various ways, it has been emphasised that the path of virtuous
deeds is the only discipline acceptable to God. In the hymn of Dharam khand, which lays down man’s duties
in life, Guru Nanak advises that man’s assessment will be entirely according to his deeds and that final
approval will be only by God’s Grace.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Extreme humility is the dominant tone of all the Gurus’ hymns. Throughout in comparison to
God and even to others, they speak of themselves as the lowest of the low. The theological fundamentals
and the doctrines of the Sikh religion are clearly and completely embodied in Guru Granth Sahib.
CREATION OF THE KHALSA PANTH
Guru Gobind Singh did not change the religion preached by the preceding nine Gurus. He had not
only all their attributes, but also the power to mould Nanakpanthis (believers in Nanak’s faith) into a nation
and then to fire that nation with an ideal — the ideal of the Kha/sa Commonwealth. His greatest achievement
was the establishment of the Khalsa by the famous amrit ceremony on 30th March, 1699 by which he raised
the Khalsa, and bestowed on them his blessings and the gift of valour in war. He bound them to a strict code
of conduct (Rahitnama), and with unshorn hair, beard and turban, he gave the Sikhs a distinct identity. He
ordained that they should uphold righteousness in every place and destroy evil in every form by all means
available and should not submit to z#/wm (oppression and tyranny) but resist it, if necessary, by force. Guru
Gobind Singh also made it explicitly clear that Sikhs were neither Hindus nor Muslims, and forbade worship
of any of their idols or tombs; nor were they to follow the teachings of their holy books. Only Guru Granth
Sahib was to be their Scripture. In a Sawazya (religious text) composed by him, he states :
Pae gahe jab te tumre,
tab te kou ankh tare nahin aniyo.
Ram, Rahim, Puran, Ouran anek
Rabin mat ek na manio
Simrat, Sastar, Bed Sabhai,
Baho bhed kahain, ham ek na janio
Sri Aspan kirpa Tumri Kar, main na
Kahio, Sab Tohe bakhanio.
(Chaupat, Dasam Granth)
(Lord, ever since I have fallen at your feet,
I care not for anyone else,
The different paths of Ram, Rahim, Puran and Quran, I do not accept.
The Simritis, Shastras, and the Vedas lay down many doctrines, but I recognise not any of them.
O Lord, I have composed these hymns by Your Grace, and it is all what You have taught me.)
(Ram here is the Hindu deity Ram of Ayodhya and Rahim refers to Prophet Mohammed of Islam).
Shortly before his death in 1708, Guru Gobind Singh declared to his assembled Khalsa that with
his death the succession of living Gurus will terminate, and that thereafter the Guru will be mystically present
within the sacred scripture and the corporate community, the Khalsa Panth. Some of the disciples who were
present, Bhai Nand Lal, Bhai Mani Singh, Dhadi Nath Mall and the Court poet Sainapat have described in
detail the ceremony by which the Guru conferred Guruship on Guru Granth Sahib. The Guru is reported to
have informed his Khaésa that henceforth the divine authority of the Guru would be in the Guru Granth
Sahib and the Khalsa Panth, and that all issues concerning belief or practice should be referred to them for
guidance as and when necessary, for a final decision. The Guru is reported to have recited the following
hymn composed by him :
Agya bhai Akal ki tabhi chalayo Panth,
Sab Sikhan ko hukam hai Guru Manyo Granth
Guru Granth ji manyo pargat Guran ki deh
Jo Prabhu ko milbo chahe khoj shabad men le
(Under orders of the Immortal Being, the Panth was created; All the Sikhs are enjoined to accept
the Granth as their Guru, Consider the Guru Granth as representing the Guru’s body. Those who wish to
meet God can find the way in its hymns.)
(Hari Ram Gupta, Hastory of the Sikhs, Vol. 1, p. 327)
Thus started the doctrine of the Guru Granth and the Guru Panth which add up to the presence of
the Guru in the world today.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
BANDA ESTABLISHES FIRST SIKH STATE
Shortly before his demise in 1708 at Nanded in South India, Guru Gobind Singh sent Banda Singh
Bahadur to the Punjab with a small army to carry on the Khalsa mission and conduct the final phase of the
Khalsa struggle against the Mughal Empire. In May 1710, the Khalsa army under Banda conquered Sarhind
province lying between the rivers Satluj and the Yamuna. Shortly afterwards, Banda extended the boundaries
of the Sikh state to the Ganga in the East and up to the banks of the river Ravi in the West. He also
conquered some parts of what is now West Punjab. Banda established the first ever independent Sikh state,
complete with a royal seal, its own coin, and an efficient administrative system. Even though the first Sikh
state was short-lived, its effect on the Sikhs was electrifying.
After the defeat of Banda Bahadur in 1716, the Sikhs were almost wiped out. The Mughal
Emperor Faruk Siyar issued an edict according to which every Sikh was to be arrested and offered only one
option, either Islam or death. This order was carried out with great zeal. With the death sentence on their
heads, the Sikhs withdrew to the Punjab hills where they sought refuge in the jungles. Safe in these
inaccessible jungles, they sang Raj Karega Khalsa (The Khalsa shall rule) for the fulfilment of their aspirations
and bade their time.
SIKHS ESTABLISH THEIR KINGDOM
Tyranny does not have a long life and tyrants always perish under the weight of their own sins.
Nine foreign invasions from the North by the dreaded Nadir Shah and his General Ahmad Shah Durani, and
one Maratha incursion, caused the gradual weakening of the Mughal rule in Punjab. When this happened,
the Khalsa left the jungles and descended into the plains of the Punjab, carrying fire and sword everywhere.
They humbled the Mughals and formed independent principalities known as mis/s on the ashes of the Mughal
empire. They exercised sovereignty in the Punjab and sang Ra Karega Khalsa with every justification. In the
words of Khushwant Singh, “Ranjit Singh hammered these Sikh factions (the m7s/s) into a nation and made it
strong and prosperous. The Sikh nation became not only the strongest Indian power, but also one of the
most powerful sovereign States in Asia.”
(A Hiastory of the Sikhs, Vol. 2, p. 3, Third Impression, 1981)
SIKH NATION RULES NORTH INDIA
Indians who now become irritated on hearing Sikhs claiming to be a nation, forget or choose to
forget that the territories of the Sikh nation extended from the borders of China and Tibet in the North to
the deserts of Sindh in the South, and from Afghanistan in the North-West to the river Ganga in the East.
Present day Indians also forget that it was the Sikh nation which put an end to the perpetual foreign invasions
of India from the North-West which had been going on for more than a thousand years. The Sikh nation
sealed the Khyber pass. It was also for the first time in the history of India, that a military force from the
East crossed the river Indus when the Sikh General Hari Singh Nalwa wrested the valley of Peshawar from
the Afghans and made inroads into what is now Afghanistan. But for General Hari Singh’s conquest of the
Trans-Indus territory of Hazara and Peshawar and its annexation to the Sikh Kingdom, these fertile and
strategic areas would not have been a part of the British Indian Empire, nor would Pakistan have inherited
these areas at the time of the partition of India in 1947. For this, Pakistan owes a debt of gratitude to the
Sikh nation. The Sikh nation, which possessed one of the most powerful and disciplined armies in the whole
of Asia was highly respected even in Europe. Louis Philippe of France and King William of England sent
presents to the Sikh monarch, Maharaja Ranjit Singh, all the way from Europe.
Ranjit Singh named his government, Szrcar-e-Khalsa, but it was hardly the government of the Khadsa
Panth. Ranjit Singh had so many non-Sikh Ministers, Generals and other non-Sikhs in positions of power,
that in the end it was these non-Sikhs who brought about the dissolution of the Sikh Ra. The true standard
bearers of the Khalsa Panth, reared from the beginning on a republican principle, were the Khalsa mis/s, who
fought against the greatest conquerors of all time to save the Panth from extinction. Whereas Ranjit Singh
showed great kindness to the British, almost to the extent of becoming subservient to them, the mzs/s showed
scant respect for the British.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Ranjit Singh not only unceremoniously liquidated all the /zs/s in order to become an autocratic
monatch, but also suspended all the institutions of the Khalsa, such as the gurmatta, the Sarbat Khalsa and the
Khalsa Dal.
The gurmatta (the mind or intention of the Guru) was a resolution passed at a meeting of the Sarbat
Khalsa (all the mis/ leaders and their followers) in the presence of Guru Granth Sahib. Such a decision was
considered a decision of the Guru Panth, the corporate Guru of the Sikhs. During the period of the mis/s, the
doctrine of the Guru Panth was elevated to a supreme authority, and it found its clearest expression in the
gurmatta which was binding on all Sikhs. This practice of the miés/s of determining all important questions
relating to the Panth by a gurmatta was abandoned by Ranjit Singh, who appropriated the decision making
process as his sovereign right. The non-compliance with this doctrine of the Guru Panth, the supreme
authority of the Khalsa, was probably the main cause of the fall of Ranjit Singh’s kingdom, for, after his death,
there was no corporate body or institution of the Khalsa to carry on the Sikh Rv. The effective control of the
kingdom fell into non-Sikh hands, Dogras and Brahmins who were all intent on feathering their own nest.
The doctrine of the Guru Panth was revived in 1873 by the Singh Sabha Movement.
Ranjit Singh surrounded himself with a coterie of sycophants comprising Dogtas, Brahmins and
Muslims, and forgot that it was on the strength of Khalsa arms that he came to power. The stalwarts of the
Panth, such as General Sham Singh Atari, General Hari Singh Nalwa, Baba Sahib Singh Bedi of Una, a direct
descendant of Guru Nanak and Akali Phula Singh, the Jathedar of the Akal Takht were all distanced away
and tactfully, but without fail, eliminated from all effective voice in the councils of his government. He raised
the alien hill Dogras, Dhyan Singh, Kushal Singh and Gulab Singh, almost from the gutter to positions of
supreme authority in his government. The insignificant Purbia Brahmins, Tej Singh and Lal Singh, were
granted such great influence that eventually they were raised to the supreme command of the Khalsa Army.
By doing this and forgetting, that the Guru had bestowed the Patshahi (sovereignty) on the Khalsa Panth,
“Ranjit Singh dug his own grave, the graves of his descendants and paved the way for the eventual
enslavement of the Sikh people.”
(Kapur Singh’s Parasaraprasna, p. 239)
ANGLO-SIKH WARS
As long as Maharaja Ranjit Singh was alive, the British kept their distance. They coveted the
territories of the Sikh nation, but although they had conquered the rest of India, they dared not move against
the mighty Ranjit Singh.
After the death of Maharaja Ranjit Singh, the crafty British annexed Punjab through the
treacherous and treasonable acts of Tej Singh, Lal Singh and the Dogra Gulab Singh, all of whom, for
personal gain, betrayed the trust placed in them by the descendants of Ranjit Singh. But, in spite of the
treachery and betrayal of the Dogras and the Purbias, it was no easy walk-over for the British. They had to
fight eight bloody battles against the Kha/sa army before they could annex the Sikh kingdom.
The battles fought at Mudki (18-12-1845), Ferozeshahr (21-12-1845), Aliwal (27-1-1846),
Sabraon (10-2-1846), Buddowal (22-2-1846), Ramnagar (22-11-1848), Chellianwala (13-1-1849) and Gujrat
(21-2-1849) were the bloodiest battles the British had fought in their entire history. British accounts of these
battles, glorify the feats of their army but the truth is that the British were making no headway, so much so
that in England, the aged Duke of Wellington threatened to come to India and take over the command of the
British forces fighting the Khalsa army.
The supplies of arms and rations to the Khalsa army were cut off by a treacherous civil government
at Lahore under Dogta Gulab Singh and the non-Sikh generals, Tej Singh and Lal Singh, treacherously sold
their tactical plans and their lives to the crafty British. In the battle of Mudki, on 18th December, 1845, the
Khalsa army was considered the loser, simply because their General, traitor Lal Singh, a Brahmin, after issuing
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
attack orders, ran away with the munition stores, in accordance with a plan previously approved and agreed
to by the enemy. In the battle of Ferozeshahr (formerly Pheru Shahr), on 21st December, 1845, although
the Generals Lal Singh and Tej Singh shamelessly repeated their tactics of three days earlier, the Khalsa army
who had gone without food rations and who had been deprived of their reserve munitions through treachery,
inflicted such heavy crushing losses on the enemy that according to the admissions made by Sir Robert Cust,
in his log book entry, dated 22nd December, 1845, the British Command had formally decided at night to
“Surrender unconditionally” the next morning before the Khalsa army. Lord Hardinge, the British Governor-
General, who took part in this battle, also thought that everything was over. After making his will, he handed
it to his son, who was his ADC, together with his sword — a present from the Duke of Wellington and
which once belonged to Napoleon, his Star of the Bath, and ordered him to escape in the night to
Ferozepore, saying “if the day were lost, I must fall.” The next morning, it was again the ignominious
sabotage and treachery of Lal Singh and Tej Singh which saved the British Indian Empire when they deceived
and persuaded the fresh reinforcements of the Khalsa army to refrain from pressing the previous evening’s
advantage by attacking the beaten enemy.
Before the Sabraon battle of 10th February, 1846, Gulab Singh Dogtra, the de facto Prime Minister
of the Sikh Government at Lahore, was already in treasonable communication with the British, and had
promised to render all possible help and aid to the enemy to inflict a defeat on the Khalsa army with a view to
facilitating occupation of Lahore by the British forces. Gulab Singh Dogtra also had his private army of
40,000 Dogrtas standing by, ready to come to the aid of the British, in case they found difficulty in defeating
the Khalsa army. While these battles were going on, Gulab Singh looted Ranjit Singh’s treasury. “Gulab
Singh Dogra carried off to Kashmir the accumulated treasures of Ranjit Singh. Sixteen carts were filled with
Rupees and other silver coins, while 500 horsemen were each entrusted with a bag of gold mohurs (coins) and
his orderlies with jewellery and other valuable articles.” (Latif, Hastory of Punjab, p. 507). Lord Hardinge, the
British Governor-General of India, in a letter dated 2nd March 1845, to his wife, Lady Hardinge, wrote,
“The man I have to deal with, Gulab Singh, is the greatest rascal in Asia.” (Hardinge Family Papers,
Penhurst, Kent).
Lord Gough, the British Commander-in-Chief, described the battle of Sabraon as the Waterloo of
India, for had they lost it, that would have been the end of the British in India. But the battle at Chellianwala
was even more ferocious and was the worst defeat suffered by the British since their occupation of India.
Three thousand British soldiers and thousands of their native soldiers lay dead. The Khalsa fired a 21 gun
salute to commemorate their victory. Lord Dalhousie, the new British Governor-General, made a candid
admission of the true state of affairs in a private letter to the Duke of Wellington. He wrote, “In public I
make, of course, the best of things. I treat it as a great victory. But writing confidentially to you, I do not
hesitate to say that I consider my position grave.”
The British realised that unless they won the next battle, they would have to leave India. They
brought to Punjab reinforcements from the rest of India, fresh troops and more heavy guns. On the other
hand, the Khalsa army, already depleted after so many battles, suffered from desertions brought about by the
crafty British. The Dogras and Rohillas deserted the Sikhs and joined the British. In the last battle of Gujrat,
fought on 21st February, 1849, the Khalsa army which had held the British power at bay with a stubborn skill
hitherto unparalleled in Indian history, had to give way. The weight of numbers and armour decided the
issue. The battle of Gujrat ended the Sikh resistance to the British.
On March 30, 1849, in full Durbar at Lahore, a proclamation was read which formally placed the
land of the Five Rivers under the British sovereignty. The young Maharaja Dalip Singh was made to hand
over the Koh-i-Nur diamond to the British Governor-General and to step down from his illustrious father’s
throne — never to sit on it again.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
BRITISH ATTEMPTS TO HINDUISE SIKHISM
The first thing the British did after annexing all the territory of the Sikh nation was to take over
control of all important Sikh shrines, including the Golden Temple. The uncanny British knew because of
the ferocious defence put up by the Khalsa army during the Anglo-Sikh wars, that the military power of the
Sikhs and their valour in war emanated from their religious zeal, which in turn was inspired by their ideology
and their holy shrines. They made sure that the Sikh religious places were kept in hands that were hostile to
the teachings of the Sikh Gurus. These hands also sought to direct them to the ritualistic maze of Hinduism.
Accordingly, Hindu mahants and pujaris and others leaning towards Hinduism, were appointed to manage the
Sikh gurdwaras, so as to be instrumental in the erosion of the Sikh faith. The British conferred proprietory
rights on these mahants. As a result, Hindu rites were introduced and even Hindu idols were installed in
sacred Sikh shrines including the Golden Temple.
The Sikhs resented the objectionable Hindu practices introduced with the connivance and support
of the British. The resentment, in time, took shape in the form of the Sikh Gurdwaras Reform Movement,
which had as its object the wresting of control of all gurdwaras from the hands of the corrupt Hindu mahants.
A corps of volunteers, the Akal Dal was constituted for taking over gurdwaras from recalcitrant mahants.
The Akali Dal became the spearhead of the struggle for the liberation of Sikh places of worship which were
under the control of the mabants. The Akal Dal made great sacrifices during this passive struggle. The
struggle went on for many years and many Akalis faced bullets and sacrificed their lives during the reform
movement. There were Akali morchas (unarmed confrontations) at Guru Ka-Bagh, Muktsar and Jaito.
Hundreds of Sikhs were killed. Finally, perturbed at the effect which these agitations were having on Sikh
soldiers in the Indian Army, the British relented and the Sikh Gurdwaras Act of 1925, which met all demands
of the Sikhs, was passed. It vested the control and management of the Golden Temple and all other
historical Sikh shrines in Punjab in the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee, a representative body of
the Sikhs, and the Aka Dal became the political party of the Sikhs.
PARTITION OF INDIA
At the time of partition of India in 1947, the leaders of the Indian National Congress, in particular
Mahatma Gandhi and Pandit Nehru, assured the Sikhs that they would be given a semi-autonomous State in
the Punjab. All the volumes of the “Transfer of Power Documents” reveal that the British did their best to
persuade the Sikhs to ask for a separate independent state. Putting blind faith in the assurances of the
Congress leaders, the Sikhs did not listen. They were led up the garden path by the Congress leaders only to
be betrayed later. They had been assured, repeatedly, that the Congress would not let down the Sikhs in any
constitutional arrangements for the independence of India.
For example, as far back as 1929, at the annual session of the Indian National Congress, held that
year in Lahore, which was presided over by Jawaharlal Nehru, the following resolution was passed :
“The Congress assures the Sikhs that no solution in any future Constitution of India will be
acceptable to the Congress that does not give them (the Sikhs) full satisfaction.” (A. C. Banerjee : Indian
Constitutional Documents, Vol. I, p. 317)
Again in 1931, while addressing a meeting of Sikhs at the Sis Gang Gurdwara in Delhi, Mahatma
Gandhi told the Sikhs :
“IT ask you to accept my word and the resolution of the Congress that it will not betray a single
individual much less the community of our Sikh friends. You have no reason to fear that it (the Congress)
would betray you. For, the moment it does so, the Congress would not only thereby seal its own doom but
that of the country too.”
Mahatma Gandhi went on to say :
“Moreover the Sikhs are a brave people. They know how to safeguard their rights by the exercise
of arms if it should come to that. What more can I say than this : let God be witness to the bond that binds
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
me and the Congress with you. In case of betrayal, the Sikhs could in that case take their A/rpans (sabres) in
hand with perfect justification before God and man.” (The Young India, March 19th, 1931)
In 1946, at the Congress Committee session at Calcutta, Nehru said :
“The brave Sikhs of the Punjab are entitled to a special consideration. I see nothing wrong in an
area and set-up in the North wherein the Sikhs can experience the glow of freedom. Redistribution of
provincial boundaries is essential and inevitable. I stand for semi-autonomous units. If the Sikhs desire to
function in such a unit, I would like them to have a semi-autonomous unit within India so that they have a
sense of freedom.” (New Cambridge History of India, p. 205, The Statesman, Calcutta, July 7, 1946)
In March 1946, when the British Cabinet Mission arrived in New Delhi, they met the Sikh leaders,
Master Tara Singh, Giani Kartar Singh, Harnam Singh and Baldev Singh. Members of the Cabinet Mission
asked the Sikh leaders to “specifically express their views on whether they favoured a united India, or its
division, and in the case of its division, whether they would join India or Pakistan, or would they like to have
a state of their own.” The Sikh spokesman, Master Tara Singh, said that they were for a separate Sikh state
with the right to federate either with India or Pakistan. Giani Kartar Singh elaborated the latter alternative as
a “province of the Sikhs where they would be in a dominant position.” The Congress Working Committee
on learning this, quickly passed a resolution assuring the Sikhs “of all possible support in removing their
legitimate grievances and in securing adequate safeguards for the protection of their just interests in the
Punjab.” In response, the Sikhs abandoned their demand for a separate Sikh state and threw their lot with
the Congress which resulted in Baldev Singh joining Nehru’s interim Government as Defence Minister on
2nd September, 1946. (New Cambridge History of India, pp. 176-177)
In a resolution moved by Nehru on 9th December, 1946, in the Constituent Assembly, Nehru said
“Adequate safeguards would be provided for minorities in India. It is a declaration, pledge and an
understanding before the world, a contract with millions of Indians and therefore in the nature of an oath we
must keep.” (B. Shiva Rao : Framing of the Indian Constitution — A Study, p. 181)
Even as late as 5th January, 1947, at the Congress session, at Delhi, the Congress leaders again
publicly repeated assurance of its support for minorities, particularly the Sikhs.
In April 1947, Mr. Jinnah, in consultation with certain most powerful leaders of the British
Cabinet in London, offered, to the Sikhs, first through Master Tara Singh and then through the Maharaja of
Patiala, a sovereign Sikh state, comprising areas lying to the west of Panipat and east of the left bank of the
Ravi river, on the understanding that this state would confederate with Pakistan on very advantageous terms
to the Sikhs. Master Tara Singh summarily rejected this attractive offer and the Maharaja of Patiala declined it
after consulting Sardar Patel and Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru. (4re S7khs a Nation ?, p. 99)
On the 17th of May, 1947, Lord Mountbatten, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, Nawab Liagat Ali Khan
and Sardar Baldev Singh, flew to London on the invitation of the British Cabinet, in search of a final solution
to the Indian communal problem. When the Congress and the Muslim league failed to strike any mutual
understanding and Pandit Nehru decided to return to India, the British Cabinet leaders conveyed to Sardar
Baldev Singh that if he stayed behind, arrangements might be made “so as to enable the Sikhs to have
political feet of their own, on which they may walk into the current of world history.” Baldev Singh promptly
divulged the contents of this confidential offer to Pandit Nehru, and in compliance with the latter’s wishes,
declined to stay back. He flew back to India after giving the following brave message to the press :
“The Sikhs have no claims to make on the British except the demand that they should quit India.
Whatever political rights and aspirations the Sikhs have, they shall have them satisfied through the goodwill
of the Congress and the Hindus.” (4ve Sikhs a Nation ?, p. 101)
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Immediately after independence of India, the Sikhs were unashamedly betrayed by the Indian
National Congress. They were deceived and denied the promised “Semi-autonomous Unit” in Punjab. The
Congress reneged on their solemn promise which Nehru had described as “a contract” and “in the nature of
an oath”; the promises on which the Sikhs had acted by opting for India and rejected Jinnah’s very tempting
offer of a sovereign State federated with Pakistan. J. N. Sahni, the veteran editor of the Hindustan Times
wrote, “The letting down of the Sikhs was not an act of carelessness on the part of the Congress leaders, nor
even a blunder, but an act of gross and unpardonable betrayal.”
In 1947, when the Sikh leader Master Tara Singh reminded Nehru of the solemn promises made to
the Sikhs by Congress leaders, and of his speech in Calcutta a year earlier, Nehru replied, “the situation is
different now.” The Sikh leader was branded “an extremist” and imprisoned for demanding a measure of
autonomy for the Sikhs.
Master Tara Singh was not the only one to clash with Nehru on the issue of an autonomous state
for the Sikhs. Hukum Singh, who later became the Speaker of the Indian Parliament, was a member of the
Constituent Assembly which drafted the Constitution of free India. He walked out of the Assembly when he
found that the Congress leaders were going back on their assurances to the Sikhs, and later all the four Sikh
members of the Constituent Assembly refused to sign the Assembly’s Report. Hukum Singh had the guts to
call Nehru a cheat. He is on record as having made the following statement :
“Pandit Nehru is, to say the least, the spearhead of militant Hindu chauvinism who glibly talks
about nationalism, a tyrant who eulogises democracy and a Goebelian (Le., like Goebels) liar — in short, a
political cheat, deceiver and double-dealer in the service of Indian reaction.” (Amritsar, p. 38)
ROOT-CAUSE OF THE CRISIS IN PUNJAB
Sikhs who keep reminding the Congress leaders of their broken promises are readily branded as
secessionists, traitors and troublemakers, when in truth it is the double-dealing Congress leaders like Nehru
and Patel who are the real culprits who treacherously betrayed the Sikhs.
It is the reneging by the Congress leaders on solemn promises made to the Sikhs, followed by
equally grave injustices, such as the diversion of Punjab’s water and hydro-power resources to the
neighbouring states — a death blow to Sikh farmers, which is the root-cause of the present trouble in the
Punjab. The Indian Government has divided the Punjabis along communal lines and successfully carried out
the propaganda that Sikhs are terrorists, anti-nationals and separatists. The Government’s heavy-handed
approach in dealing with the Sikhs which includes random killings and casual torture, has further deepened
and solidified the division. This has made a unified and stable Punjab a remote possibility. The Punjab
problem has been very accurately assessed by Dr Madanjit Kaur of Guru Nanak Dev University :
“The present generation of the Sikh community is facing a problem of discontent, and is in direct
clash with the State which has been evading basic issues of the Punjab problem for decades and instead has
been following a policy of tyranny, suppression and violation of human rights by introducing draconian laws,
extra-judicial measures, illegal detentions in police custody, locking in jails without trials and eliminating the
Sikh youth in false encounters.” (Professor Madanjit Kaur in Co-existence in a Pluralistic Society, p. XIV)
Sikhs can never tolerate injustice and tyranny. It is their ideology to fight the two. They are the
people who humbled the mighty Mughals and built a kingdom on the ashes of the Mughal Empire. Such
being the case, in my view, they are not going to easily forget what is lawfully due to them. Hence, the
struggle for an autonomous State will, I believe, go on and on until the promises made to the Sikhs are
fulfilled. Time is on the side of the Sikhs. Knowing what the Sikhs are, I do not think there can be any peace
in Punjab, until all the injustices committed against the Sikhs are addressed to their satisfaction.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
SIKHS ARE A SOVEREIGN PEOPLE
As a result of two critical events in their history, the first in the middle of the nineteenth and the
second in the middle of the twentieth century, the Sikhs have become a dispossessed nation, dispossessed of
their territories through treachery, treason and deceit. In the first event, the Anglo-Sikh wars, the crafty
British successfully promoted treachery and treason amongst the Generals and Ministers of the Sikh nation.
In the second event, the partition of India, the efforts of the Sikhs to obtain political control over a
small part of their nation’s former vast territories, were thwarted by deception on the part of Nehru and his
colleagues in the Indian National Congress. Nevertheless, the lack of political control over any territory does
not make the Sikhs a non-nation, for, they have all the other attributes of a nation, a distinct race with their
own language, culture and religion, in addition to the undeniable historical evidence of their being the former
rulers of North India. The Sikhs are one of the twenty or so nations that constitute present day India. After
all, a nation is merely the crystallisation of a cultural ideal, the manifestation of a coherent personality usually
based on race, religion and language. The Sikh nation provides the most conclusive evidence of this ultimate
and abiding definition of nationhood. They are now in the same position in which the Jews were until the
creation of Israel. They believe that it is their destiny to rule in their homeland. To others, this may appear to
be blatant wishful thinking, but for the Sikhs, this belief is an affirmation of their faith in the words of their
last Guru. At every Ardas (supplication), the recital by the congregation of Raj Karega Khalsa (the Khalsa shall
Rule) echoes and resonates within the four walls of every gurdwara in the world.
In 1830, when asked by Capt. Murray, the British Charge-de-Affairs at Ludhiana, from what
source the Sikhs derived their earthly sovereignty, for, by the rights of treaty or lawful succession they had
none, Bhai Rattan Singh Bhangu, replied promptly and accurately :
Dhur dargaahon hum lei Patshaahi
Sri Sateur ke mukh te pahi,
Singh hoe raakhaon him kaan,
Alerey gaerey ka sangeh furmaan.
(The Sikhs’ right to earthly sovereignty is based on the Will of God as authenticated by the Guru,
and therefore, other inferior sanctions are unnecessary) (Rattan Singh Bhaneu in Prachin Panth Prakash)
There are those who accuse the Sikhs of living in the past, of trumpeting their past glory and of
being oblivious of the present world. These are the people who gape with horror when they hear Sikhs
singing Raj Karega Khalsa and it is they who are oblivious, to the Divine truth that sovereignty on this earth is
by Divine sanction. They fail to realise the fallacy of identifying sovereignty with power. No matter how
mighty a nation may be, it cannot stop or prevent what is ordained by God. The ghastly civil war in
Yugoslavia demonstrates what happens when a federation fragments due to Divine intervention and old
blood-feuds break out again. The French, Germans and Britons have fought in the two World Wars. Spain
has been through a civil war, Italy fought both against the Germans and with them, and the Germans, French
and British all lost their empires through defeat in battle or economics. All this happened in less than a
century. And in very much less time, the mighty Russian empire, which straddled over most of Europe and
Asia, has torn itself apart and disintegrated into sixteen independent sovereign States. When the time arrived,
States which had been governed with an iron grip, became sovereign in a matter of days, in fulfilment of their
destiny. All this is again undoubtedly, due to the result of Divine intervention.
So much has happened in the last hundred years. Who can predict what will happen in the next
hundred ? In any case, what is a hundred years in the life of a nation ? Sikhs, especially the devout Khalsa,
who revere the words of their last Guru as the revealed truth, firmly believe that the time will come when
their Raj Karega Khalsa prayer shall be answered, their aspirations will be fulfilled and they will again rule the
sacred land of their ancestors. Having experienced, enjoyed and exercised sovereignty over the whole of
North India, following the benediction and prophecy of Guru Gobind Singh and with memories of the Sikh
Raj not that distant, the Sikhs can never shed their sovereign nation mind-set which has become a pillar of
their religious beliefs.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
As the former rulers of North India, including most of present day Pakistan, and having been
outwitted by Nehru of an autonomous Sikh state, the Sikhs have every right to aspire for political power in
the Punjab, their ancestral homeland, by all lawful means. In view of the promises made to them, at the time
of the partition of India, the Sikhs have a moral, indeed a lawful right to an autonomous Sikh State in the
Union of India. With their proven bravery in war, such a State, on the northern border of India would be an
asset to India, for it would be a formidable bulwark against any foreign invasion from the North. Happy and
contented with their autonomous Sikh State, the brave Sikhs would defend it to the last man.
The Sikhs of the Punjab who are demanding justice, deserve sympathy and support, not
condemnation as separatists and traitors. As pointed out by Sirdar Kapur Singh, it is time for those who
govern India to realise, that “a satisfied and properly integrated-to-the-nation Sikh people can be an
invaluable and lasting asset to any state, more so India, in the soil and tradition of which they are rooted, just
as a frustrated and suppressed Sikh people can be an obvious weakness in the strength of the nation.”
(Kapur Singh in The Sikh Review, August, 1992)
The Sikhs have not only a glorious past, but also, in my view, a bright future. Although they are
now facing extremely adverse circumstances in the Punjab, they have not shown any despondency or given
way to frustration. This is because they practise charhdi kala which means, in the words of Dr Baljit Singh
Bagga, “the waxing mood and is the equivalence of a mind that never despairs, never admits defeat and
refuses to be crushed by adversities.” Abiding faith in their religion gives them solace, sustains them in their
difficulties and keeps alive their aspirations, their desire and determination for the restoration of their rule in
the Punjab. A people blessed with such an indomitable spirit cannot be suppressed forever and must, in my
view, become sovereign sooner or later in fulfilment of their destiny. With the winds of change blowing all
over the world, the denial to the Sikhs of their legitimate promised autonomous unit, may well result
ultimately in their having an independent sovereign state. This is not impossible because even the most
tyrannical government in the world, which enforced apartheid (segregation of the natives) at the point of the
gun, has at last conceded the just rights of the natives who now govern the whole of South Africa for the first
time in over 300 years. According to the great Tibetan sage, the Dalai Lama, “with optimism and great
patience even the impossible becomes possible. But without optimism you cannot achieve even the simplest
task.” (Asia Magazine, 22nd May, 1994) Believing in chardbi kala the Sikhs are the most optimistic people on
this earth, and as for patience, except for a few hot-heads, they have unlimited patience. Hence, it is
inevitable that one day the Sikhs will again rule Punjab and “experience the glow of freedom.”
SIKH RELIGION
For a precise account of the Sikh religion, we are indebted to Dr Kharak Singh of the Institute of
Sikh Studies at Chandigarh. “Sikhism, a revealed religion, is the youngest among the major world faiths. This
system, as preached by Guru Nanak, has a universal appeal and an eternal relevance. Some of its essential
features may be briefly reproduced below :
(a) Monotheism: Guru Nanak believed in only One God as the Ultimate Reality. In the Ma/ Mantra
he described Him thus; “The Sole Supreme Being; of Eternal Manifestation; Creator; Immanent Reality;
Without Fear; Without Rancour; Timeless Being; Unincarnated; Self-Existent.’
(b) Reality Of The World: Guru Nanak rejected the earlier view of the world being mithya or unreal
or a place of suffering and human life a punishment. Since God is Real, he argued, so is His creation — ‘the
continents, the universe, the worlds and the forms ......’. ‘In the midst of air, water, fire and the nether regions,
the world has been installed as a dharamsal or a place for perceiving and practising righteous actions.’ “This
world is the abode of the Lord who resides in it.’ “Human life is a rare opportunity for spiritual fulfilment.’
(c) Goal Of Life: In Sikhism, the goal is not moksha, nirvana or personal salvation after death. The
goal is to attain the status of gurmukbh ot sachiara ot a godman in this life. A gurmukh is one attuned to the Will
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
of God, who engages himself in the fulfilment of the Divine Will. There is no selfishness in his goal. He
wants to liberate not only himself, but the whole world.
(d) Methodology : Guru Nanak did not accept the dichotomy between empirical and spiritual lives
pteached by earlier systems. Asceticism, which was considered essential for spiritual attainments, was
described by the Guru as escapism and parasitism. He advocated a householder’s life, with emphasis on hard
work, honest means for a livelihood, and _ sharing of earnings with others in need. God loves His creation,
and takes pleasure in looking after it. In fact, He is immanent in it. So, the godman must also love his fellow
beings and carry out the Divine Will through altruistic deeds. Only thus, can one find the path to Him. Full
social participation, and struggle against oppression, injustice and tyranny, in the cause of the poor and the
weak, are an essential part of the Guru’s system. While the need for worldly pursuits is recognised, there is a
very clear warning against acquisitiveness, accumulation of wealth and indulgence or what is called
consumerism. Ritualism is condemned. Instead the emphasis is on Naam, 1.e., remembering God or keeping
Him in mind or being conscious of Him always. This means a realization of His immanence in the entire
creation, or living in His presence all the time. All this comes under sach achar or truthful living, which, the
Guru says, is even higher than truth itself. Sikhism is, therefore, a system of noble deeds and moral conduct.
It is the deeds in one’s lifetime that determine whether one is close to or away from God.
(e) Equality And Human Dignity: Sikhism recognises no distinction between man and man on the
basis of birth or otherwise. The Guru rejected the 3,000 year old caste system in India, and accepted and
associated with the lowliest among them. His concept of equality for women can never be surpassed. ‘How
can she be considered inferior, when she gives birth to kings ?’ he asked. He also preached a life of honour
and dignity. “He who lives with dishonour, does not deserve the food he eats’, says the Guru.
(f) Removal Of Inhibitions : Apart from the caste system, which restricted one’s right to spiritual
pursuits and selection of occupation, there were several other restraints in the earlier religious systems in
India. Ahimsa, celibacy, vegetarianism, and asceticism were considered essential in the practice of religion.
He rejected all these and recommended a houseoldet’s life with emphasis on noble deeds, dignity of labour,
service to humanity, and full social responsibility. Later, the Tenth Master confirmed this through his
famous Nash Doctrine by which he completely broke away from all earlier traditions.
(g) Development Of The Society : Guru Nanak was not concerned with the individual alone. His
concern covered the society as a whole. Based on the gospel preached by him, he founded a settlement
towards the end of his mission at Kartarpur, which was open to all, and in which everybody worked and ate
together. People crushed under the rigours of caste system, the oppressive alien rule and religious bigotry,
could not be expected to take over the social responsibilities and adjust to the liberation offered in the new
society, overnight. This infant society had to be nurtured for some time, and it had to spread geographically.
So, the Guru introduced the system of succession under which nine Gurus catried the mission forward up to
the time Guru Gobind Singh created the Kha/sa. A practical demonstration of Guru Nanak’s system had been
given. A personal successor after the Tenth Lord was not considered necessary, and the guruship was
conferred on the Adi Granth (Guru Granth Sahib), or the shabad or the ‘Word’ of the Lord.
(h) The Scripture: The Adi Granth, compiled by Guru Arjun Dev, with later addition of bani of
Guru Tegh Bahadur, is the sacred scripture of the Sikhs. As pointed out above, the scripture was given the
status of Guru by the Tenth Master. This appointment of the Scripture or the Word as Guru is unique to
Sikhism. It simply means that in spiritualism the real Guru is the ‘Word’ or the command or shabad of the
Lord, and not the human body. Also, it is only in Sikhism that the Scripture was written and authenticated by
the founder himself or his successors. In other religions, the scriptures were written decades or even
centuries after the founders had left.
Besides the above, there are some other features that need to be mentioned. In contrast to earlier
religious systems, Sikhism is a life-affirming faith with a positive attitude towards the world. It is a religion of
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
activism, noble actions and altruistic deeds. It is a religion of hope and optimism with rich traditions of
charhdi kala or ever-rising high spirits. Pacificism and pessimism have no place in Sikh thought. Sikh
discipline is a conscious effort to live in harmony with nature and to carry out the altruistic Divine Will.
Macauliffe in his classic study The Szkb Refigion (1910), summed up the moral and political merit of
the Sikh Religion thus :
It prohibits idolatry, hypocrisy, caste-exclusiveness, the concremation of widows, the immurement
of women, the use of wine and other intoxicants, tobacco smoking, infanticide, slander, pilgrimage to sacred
rivers and tanks of Hindus; and it inculcates loyalty, gratitude for all favours received, philanthropy, justice,
impartiality, truth, honesty and all the moral and domestic virtues known to the holiest citizens of any
country.
On the originality of the Sikh religion, Macauliffe’s conclusion was :
The illustrious author of ze de Jesus asks whether great originality will again arise, or the world
would be content to follow the paths opened by the daring creators of the ancient ages. Now there is here
presented a religion totally unaffected by Semitic or Christian influences. Based on unity of God, it rejected
Hindu formalities, and adopted an independent ethical system, rituals and standards which were totally
opposed to the theological beliefs of Guru Nanak’s age and country. And we shall see hereafter, it would be
difficult to point to a religion of greater originality or to a more comprehensive ethical system.
The religion and the society founded by Guru Nanak grew steadily, and in the hands of his
successors brought about a complete revolution in the minds of the people as well as in the social and
political set-up in the north-west of India. His followers challenged the oppressive Mughal rule, overthrew it,
and supplanted it with an empire of their own, based on egalitarian principles and freedom of religious
practice, with real power in the hands of the common people, who had had nothing but oppression and
exploitation at the hands of earlier rulers. The values taught by Guru Nanak are as relevant today as in the
15th century, when he started his mission. The world today needs this faith of hope and optimism that
pteaches ‘sarbat da bhala’ (welfare of all). The Sikhs owe it to the world to share their rich heritage with the
rest of mankind. Even more, they need to do this in their own interest in order to project a correct image of
themselves. (Dr Kharak Singh, in Recent Researches in Sikhism, p. 359)
“Sikhism is essentially a Religion of the Way, ie. something that must be lived and experienced
rather than something which may be intellectually grasped and declared. True, there can be no practice
without the dogma. Sikhism, therefore, has its doctrines, its dogmatic stand, its view of Reality, its view of
the nature of man, and their inter-relationship, but it lays primary stress on the practice, the discipline, the
way which leads to the ‘cessation of suffering,’ as Gautam, the Buddha formulated it.
“A careful reading and understanding of the Sikh scripture reveals that the religion of Sikhism has
three postulates implicit in its teachings. One, that there is no essential duality between the spirit and the
matter. Two, that man alone has the capacity to enter into conscious participation in the process of the
Evolution, with further implication that the process of Evolution, as understood by the modern man, has
come to a dead-end and it, therefore, must be rescued by the conscious effort of man who alone is capable
now of furthering this process. Three, that when man has reached the highest goal of Evolution, namely, the
vision of God, he must not only remain in God, but must also remain earth-conscious so as to transform this
mundane world into a higher and spiritual plane of existence.” (Kapur Singh, Szehism, an Ocecumenical Religion,
p. 94)
MISREPRESENTATION OF SIKHISM
As pointed out by Dr Kharak Singh in a recent article, “Survey of Entries on Sikhism in 50 Major
Encyclopaedias published in the West, has revealed gross misrepresentations. These include errors of fact as
well as misinterpretations of Guru Nanak’s system. The Guru has frequently been shown as a disciple of
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Kabir. Sikhism is invariably presented as a part of Hinduism, and its teachings are confused with the so-
called Sant Mat. In several cases, the authors have failed to see the unity of thought of the Ten Masters,
mistakenly referring to Guru Nanak’s philosophy as pacificism, and that of Guru Gobind Singh as militancy.
Another common misinterpretation is the theory of syncretism, which means that Sikhism is only an
amalgam of elements drawn from Hinduism and Islam, denying any originality to Guru Nanak. Recognition
of Sikhism as a revealed religion is rare. No wonder that the space given to Sikhism is extremely limited as
compared with other major faiths of the world. Some of these publications make only a passing reference to
Sikhism, while a few do not even mention it.” (Recent Researches in Sikhism, p. 304)
RECENT MISREPRESENTATIONS
The last two decades have seen the mounting of a regular campaign to misrepresent and blemish
Sikhism. This was started by Dr W. H. McLeod, a former missionary in India, who has so far produced eight
books relating to Sikhism in which he has, with insidious persistence, erroneously presented the Sikhs to the
wotld as a sect of Hinduism. According to Dr Kharak Singh, who has studied McLeod’s books, with some
concern, McLeod’s thesis revolves around the following main points :
(a) “It is misleading to call Guru Nanak the founder of Sikh religion, as he did not originate a new
school of thought or set of teachings. What Guru Nanak offers us is the clearest and most highly articulate
expression of the mrguna sampradaya, the so-called Sant tradition of Northern India, a system which he
inherited, reworked according to his own genius and passed on in a form unequalled by any other
representative of the tradition. It was the influence of Nath doctrine and practice upon Vaishnava Bhageti
which was responsible for the emergence of Sant synthesis.”
(b) “The ten Gurus never preached one set of religious doctrines or system, and particularly the
Third Guru created new institutions on the old Hindu lines, the very thing Guru Nanak had spurned. From
the Sixth Guru onwards the teachings of Guru Nanak were completely given up in favour of a militant pose
in response to socio-political situations.”
(c) “The arming of the Panth could not have been the result of any decision by Guru Hargobind,
but because of Jat influx in the Sikh fold ...... The growth of militancy within the Path must be traced
primarily to the impact of Jat cultural patterns and to economic problems which prompted a militant
response.”
(da) “The traditional account about the founding of the Khalsa on the Vaisakhi day of the year
1699, (A.D.) cannot be accepted, as there are “compulsive reasons for scepticism’, and ‘the traditions relating
to the period of Guru Gobind Singh must be, in some considerable measure, set aside. The slate must be
wiped clean and must not be reinscribed until we have ascertained just what did take place during the
eighteenth century.’
(e) “The Sikh code of discipline, Rahit Maryada, and Sikh symbols were evolved during the
eighteenth century as a result of gradual growth, though the tradition declares they were definitely settled by a
pronouncement of Guru Gobind Singh and were a part of the Vaisakhi day proceedings in 1699 (A.D.).”
(f) “Though the Gurus denounced the caste system and preached against it, yet they did not seem
sincere or serious in removing caste difference.”
(g) “The succession of Guru Granth Sahib as Guru of the Sikhs, ending the line of living Gurus on
the death of Guru Gobind Singh, was not because of an injunction of Guru Gobind Singh himself, but was a
subsequent adaptation by the Sikhs, who were fighting for their existence, to meet the needs of the Panth for
cohesion.”
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
(h) = “The authenticity of the current version of Guru Granth Sahib which is widely accepted and
revered by the Sikhs, is open to question, since there are three manuscripts (birs) available which are not
entirely identical.” (Recent Researches in Sikhism, p. 364)
Dr McLeod admits that his above mentioned assertions are mere conjectures, but he labels these as
“informed conjectures at the present state.” It would be more accurate to describe these as pure wishful and
malicious speculation, for there is not an iota of evidence to support any of these fanciful formulations. They
have all been answered and demolished by Sikh scholars in articles appearing in Advanced Studies in Sikhism,
(1989, Institute of Sikh Studies, Chandigarh) and Fundamental Issues in Sikh Studies, (1992, Institute of Sikh
Studies, Chandigarh).
ARE SIKHS HINDUS ?
The focus of this essay is on the issue whether or not there is any justification for labelling Sikhs as
a sect of Hinduism. The chief proponent of the thesis that Sikhs are part and parcel of Hinduism is again Dr
W.H. McLeod. Disregarding totally the research findings and opinions of Sikh scholars, Dr McLeod keeps
harping on his favourite thesis that Guru Nanak Dev did not start any new system of religious doctrine. He
commences Chapter II of his book The Sikhs, (1989, Columbia University Press) with the following
statement, on p. 16:
“Sikhism, we ate often told, is a sect of Hinduism. Guru Nanak may have founded a new Pant or
religious community within the larger Hindu fold, but he neither violated nor abandoned the Hindu tradition.
Born a Hindu, he remained one until the day he died, and so too did his successors. The doctrines which he
affirmed were already current in the North India of his own period and the message which he preached was
entirely congenial to many of his Hindu audience. Pantbs are a regular feature of the Hindu experience, and
Nanak, together with his followers, merely added one more. If we seek the origins of the Sikh tradition, the
place to look is surely the wider area of Hindu tradition and specifically the teachings of the Sants. Nanak
did not found “Sikhism,” for this would have meant founding something which already existed.”
And he adds, “This is one point of view.” Yes, but whose point of view ? No authority is cited.
This is his very subtle way of expressing his opinion, through an anonymous proxy. And yet on the very next
page he states, “The proposition that Sikhism is a sect of Hinduism is beginning to look distinctly
unsatisfactory.” This is because his like-minded friend, Professor Wilfred Cantwell Smith, has pointed out to
him that there is no such thing as Hinduism. McLeod accepts this and considers Hinduism as a basket of
several Indian traditions such as Nathism, Vaishnavism, Vedanta and the Sant tradition of North India.
McLeod then asserts that Guru Nanak was a practitioner of the Sant tradition like Kabir and Ravidas; that the
Sant tradition “plainly derived fundamental features of its doctrine from Vaishnava belief (Ibid., 25); that one
must acknowledge Sants to be Vaishnava bhaktas’ (Ibid., 27); that “the Sant doctrine has features derived
from Vaishnava and Nath sources” (Ibid., 25) and that “Nath influences are also present in the works of
Guru Nanak.” (Ibid., 26). No examples are cited. McLeod goes on to concede that Guru Nanak did start a
Panth (a community according to him), but it was, to use his own words, “within the larger context of the
Hindu tradition and still remaining part of it.” (Ibid., 24)
What a round-about way of saying that Sikhs are a sect of Hinduism. McLeod goes on to state that
“subsequent developments may have transformed that later Panth, but it has never renounced its direct
descent from the teachings of Nanak nor have its members effectively abandoned their place within the
structure of caste society.” In short, that Sikhs are part and parcel of Hinduism. All this has been debunked
by Daljeet Singh in his book, The Sikb Ideology, (1990, Singh Brothers, Amritsar). By comparing Sikhism with
the older Indian traditions named by McLeod, Daljeet Singh has clearly proved that Sikhism has nothing in
common with any of the older ancient traditions; that Sikhism is an entirely new revelatory religion, totally
unconnected with the Naths, the Sant tradition or Vaishnavism, and that it is different in its fundamentals,
ideology, goals, methodology and world-view. Dr McLeod’s failure to appreciate the revelatory source of
Guru Nanak’s Gurbani is a grave mischief in the face of overwhelming evidence in support of it, from the
Guru’s own pen, enshrined in Guru Granth Sahib.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Sikhism has been attacked even by persons who claim to be practising Sikhs. They have even gone
so far as to commit blasphemy by attacking Guru Granth Sahib, the “Living Guru of the Sikhs.”
First, in 1992, one Pashaura Singh submitted a Ph. D. thesis entitled “The Text and Meaning of
the Adi Granth,” to the University of Toronto, based on his work done under the guidance and supervision
of W. H. McLeod. This work has attracted world-wide adverse criticism, and Sikhs have by and large reacted
sharply to a number of misleading observations made in the thesis. Dr Kharak Singh gives five examples :
1. “Whereas McLeod accused the Sikhs of changing the basis of the Adi Granth, Pashaura Singh
goes a step further, and says that the Fifth Master also made ideological and other changes in the bani of Guru
Nanak Dev and that the Kartarpuri dr cannot be considered to be authentic in the sense that it is not a
correct compilation of the bani of the First Master.
2. The bani, as proclaimed by Guru Nanak Dev and the other Gurus is not a revealed one, for later
it can be changed, and has been changed by Guru Arjun Dev.
3. That Guru Arjun Dev made misrepresentations in so far as he passed on to the public his own
bani as that of Guru Nanak.
4, That hymns which, for the Guru, were not true bani (sachi bani) are eulogised by the scholar to be
true bani of Guru Nanak.
5. That bhagat bani was included later in the Adi Granth, by Guru Arjun Dev for mundane and
political reasons, imputing to him the desire to gain a following amongst different castes.” (Dr Kharak Singh
in Abstracts of Sikh Studies, January, 1993, p. 28)
Next, one Dr Piar Singh published a book entitled Gatha Sri Adi Granth. In the words of Dr
Kharak Singh, “It is clearly a planned work undertaken with the singular object of attacking the authenticity
of the holy Granth Sahib, and for that matter, the very foundation of the Sikh faith. It appears that the work
has been taken up in association with those who share these objectives. One cannot fail to notice that so
often the line of argument taken by the author, has been the same or similar to the one adopted by Dr W. H.
McLeod and Pashaura singh who have attacked the authenticity of the Wr at Kartarpur without examining
the manuscript.” (Abstracts of Sikh Studies, January 1993, pp. 29 & 40).
Piar Singh blames Guru Arjun Dev for changing Gurbani, and according to Dr Kharak Singh, his
statements imply four acts of blasphemy :
(a) “That bani as compiled by Guru Nanak and other Gurus, is not a revealed one. For, later it can
be changed and has been changed by Guru Arjun. Its revealed and unalterable character was thereby
destroyed by the Guru himself.
(b) That Guru Arjun made theological changes in the bani of Guru Nanak.
(c) That Guru Arjun made misrepresentations in so far as he passed on to the public his bani as that
of Guru Nanak.
(d) ‘That the hymns which, for the Guru, were not true bani (kachi bani) are eulogised by the
scholar to be true bani of Guru Nanak.” (Dr Kharak Singh in Abstracts of Sikh Studies, January, 1993 issue, p.
31)
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Dr Piar Singh has recently appeared before the Akal Takht and retracted all the mis-statements in
his book. He has also undergone the punishment for this misconduct as prescribed by the Akal Takht.)
These blasphemous attempts by Dr McLeod and his like-minded group to destroy Sikhism by
attacking the legitimacy of Guru Granth Sahib, “the living Guru of the Sikhs,” has been thoroughly exposed
and proved to be entirely groundless by Dr Kharak Singh in the January 1993 issue of Abstracts of Sikh Studies.
The truth is that many anti-Sikh elements have, and can afford to have, their knife in the back of
Sikhism, because they know that Sikhs fundamentally believe in and daily pray for sarbat da bhala (May peace
and prosperity come to all). Furthermore, the penalty which traditionally and invariably the Sikhs impose on
any transeressor of their faith, no matter how serious the transgression, is the penalty of cleaning the shoes of
the sangat (congregation), whereas in some other faiths, the penalty for blasphemy is death. And there have
never been any battles in the courts for blasphemy, a criminal offence in all civilised societies, or for
expunging false or other offensive slurs on the Sikh faith.
The Jathedar (Chief) of the Akal Takht, the lawful guardian and protector of the faith whose edict is
binding on all Sikhs, was rather inactive in the 1980’s due to frequent changes in the holder of the office.
This situation emboldened anti-Sikh elements who accordingly consider anti-Sikh rhetoric to be fair
game for their attacks and other destructive salvos, either directly or through proxies. For, it is not difficult to
find unscrupulous individuals in apparent Sikh form, who are willing to sell their soul for a few pieces of
gold. This situation has recently changed, and a few of them have been hauled up before the Akal Takht and
awatded tankhah or religious punishment. The Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee being the
supreme representative body of the Sikhs, should also respond to inaccurate statements and unfair
allegations. No one should be allowed to flout, challenge and surreptitiously change the basic historical truths
of the Sikh faith. Unless such mischievous conduct is restrained, it may well become a common occurrence,
even political fodder, that could destabilise harmonious race relations and national unity. It is high time the
Sikhs woke up and stopped people fooling around and taking liberties with their LIVING Gutu.
Long before McLeod mounted his onslaught against the Sikh faith by producing eight books in a
row in furtherance of his thesis that Sikhism is a sect of Hinduism, many other eminent writers had
acknowledged the distinctiveness of the Sikh religion. These include Rev. H. L. Bradshaw, Edward
Bittencourt, M. A. Macauliffe, Dorothy Field, Arnold Toynbee, Pearl S. Buck, Duncan Greenles, James
Hastings, Professor Indubhushan Banerjee, Professor John Clark Archer, (who even took the trouble to
personally examine the manuscript of the original Guru Granth Sahib dictated by Guru Arjun and engrossed
by Bhai Gurdas, now kept at Kartarpur and commonly known as the Kartarpuri bir), Edward Geoffrey
Parrinder, Sir Charles Elliot, Nirmal Kumar Jain, Dr Ishwari Prasad, Capt. J. D. Cunningham, M.
Elphinstone, Dr R. C. Majunmdar and Sir Lepel Griffin. All these eminent writers, after carefully studying
and researching the Sikh scripture, acknowledged that Sikhism indeed was and is a distinct religion like other
great religions of the world, wholly new, original and genuinely monotheistic. And yet, McLeod persists in
having the world believe that Sikhs are a mere sect of Hinduism. If McLeod was right, then it would appear
that all the afore mentioned men and women of international fame, were gravely in error.
It is true that originally Sikhs sprung up from amongst the Hindus, because the local population
was by and large Hindus. But right from its birth, Sikhism evolved into a separate and distinct religion from
the different branches of Hinduism. There can be no better evidence of this fact than the words of the Sikh
Gurus, the founders of the faith themselves.
Guru Nanak declared that he was neither a Hindu nor a Mussalman. To pointed questions at
different places, he replied :
‘T am not a Hindu nor a Mussalman.
I accept neither the Ved nor the Quran.”
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
“God is neither Hindu nor Mussalman.
I follow God’s right path.”
‘T accept the Path of Truth
I reject all other ways.”
(Janam Sakhi, Bhai Mani Singh)
Guru Nanak’s replies clearly indicate his complete break with his Hindu past. Sikhism has been no
part of Hinduism right from its birth. We have its founder’s word for it.
Guru Arjun, the fifth Guru, left no doubt at all on the matter. He states :
‘T do not worship with the Hindus
nor like the Muslim go to Mecca.”
‘I serve Him alone and none other,
For, we are neither Hindus nor Mussalmans.”
(Guru Granth Sahib, p. 1136)
Guru Gobind Singh, the last human Guru of the Sikhs, who put the finishing touch of perfection
to the Sikh faith, has emphasised the independence of the Sikh religion. He states :
“Ram, Rahim, Puran, Quran
Anek Kahin mat eR na manio.”
(Sawatya, Dasam Granth)
(The different paths of Ram, Rahim,
Puran and Quran, I do not accept.)
(Ram here is the Hindu deity of Ayodhya, and Rahim referes to Prophet Mohammed.)
It is abundantly clear to all right thinking men, that Sikhs are unquestionably a separate entity from
the Hindus. They are clearly distinguishable from the Hindus, not only in outward form but also in religious,
cultural and social outlook, concept of God and Gurus, mode of worship, language and contents of their
scripture, and their idea of priesthood. In fact, Sikhism has controverted almost every fundamental trait of
Hinduism.
The fundamental differences between Sikhism and Hinduism have been emphasised by Dr
Gurdarshan Singh Dhillon in a recent article :
“At one stroke, Guru Nanak made revolutionary changes to the fundamental beliefs and traditions
of the Hindus. Instead of the world being mithya, or a suffering, he called it real. He rejected monasticism,
asceticism and withdrawal from life, and instead recommended total participation in life and acceptance of
social responsibility. Instead of down-grading the status of woman in relation to spiritual life and
recommending celibacy, he recommended a householdet’s life and equality of man and woman. Instead of
the religious doctrine of Varna Ashram Dharma and consequent rules of caste, pollution, social segregation
and professional immobility, he accepted equality of all men. He rejected ahimsa as an inviolable religious
doctrine. Instead of life-negation, he recommended life-affirmation in all fields of life. In his ethical
monotheism, Guru Nanak clearly denies the idea of av/ars and their worship, including those of gods and
goddesses. Instead of religion being a matter of personal devotion and salvation, Guru Nanak, because of his
fundamental doctrine of combining the spiritual with the empirical, organised a society in which promotion
ot defence of righteousness became essential. Accordingly, Guru Nanak not only organised a society, but he
also created a system of succession so as to develop it firmly on the lines of his thesis. Hence, the very wide
differences between Hindu and Sikh societies, their value systems, their religious perceptions and social
practices.” (Recent Researches in Sikhism, p. 228)
There is no evidence at all on which Sikhs can be presented to the world as a sect of Hinduism. In
fact, the evidence points the other way. There is incontrovertible evidence that Sikhism is a world religion,
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
separate and distinct from Hinduism or any other religion for that matter. No amount of misrepresentation
of Sikh history and distortion of their holy scripture, can push the Sikhs into the Hindu fold. This is because
in the words of Dr Harnam Singh Shan :
“The Sikhs profess one of the higher religions of the world, which is not only an original, distinct
and independent faith, but is also an autonomous, complete and dynamic religion, born of a direct and
definitive revelation like other major religions of the world. It is primary in its source and pure in its
contents, as any other religion on this planet. The authenticity of its dogma, simplicity of its beliefs, exalted
moral code, internal vigour, tenacity of purpose and sustained heroism together with the religious, spiritual
energy, unshakable faith and indomitable spirit as well as the enterprising and self-sacrificing nature of its
followers have kept it intact and firm on its ground in many a crisis, during its five hundred year old history,
raising it up again with greater strength and better prospects after every attempt to annihilate it.” (Fundamental
Issues in Sikh Studies, p. 29)
Finally, note what Dr Noel Q King, Professor of Religion, University of California, Santa Cruz
(U.S.A.), has to say about Sikhism :
“Sikhism is a world religion : not only has it followers in the Punjab, all over India, in the United
Kingdom, United States, East Africa and Oceania, and elsewhere, it spans the great divide between the so-
called western religions (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) and the eastern (Hinduism and Buddhism) and
Chinese classical ideologies (Confucianism and Taoism). It also has many features which go back to the
primordial pre-Aryan religion of India. It has all these things, a personal God of love who is One and active
in the cosmos, the idea of ‘karma’, of moksha, it teaches an idea of balance and of reciprocal wholeness not
unlike but not totally like yén-yang, yet in every case it presents these ideas on its own terms, in a way which
makes it different from other religions. Again, it has a Book, but Sikhs are not just a people of a book, nor is
the Book just an enliteration of the divine word: the Guruship is invested in the word enshrined in Guru
Granth Sahib and in the Khalsa past, present and future. This means that if properly understood and fairly
presented in context and in full, Sikh Scripture and tradition have nothing to fear from any true criticism
properly used. It has never lacked critical acumen of its own. In fact, we can say the first Guru was also the
first relentless Sikh critic of all empty word-forms, of all religiosity, empty worship and blind acceptance of
tradition. It has a living — native born and organic tradition of criticism. As for the newer types of criticism
I mentioned above, a decade ago I found Sikh scholars at Chandigarh, Amritsar and Patiala deeply conversant
with the latest in structuralism, semiotics, narratology and the newest literary criticism. Sikhism has nothing
to fear, she has always welcomed scholars from wherever they come, but obviously this does not mean she
should sit around and be overtaken by the outside world and by misunderstandings. She has to make sure the
truth is established and be prepared to argue it out. She has to have everyone of her own people and well-
wishers well informed. The ignorant are not enemies, but Sikhs must not miss a single chance to tell others
the truth about their religion.” (Advanced Studies in Sikhism, p. 11)
SUMMARY OF SIKH RELIGION
Por a summary of the Sikh religion we must go back to Dr Harnam Singh Shan :
“Sikhism is the youngest and the most modern of the world religions, being a wholly original and
practical religion, having the whole humanity in view for its welfare and amelioration. It has been acclaimed
by Bradshaw as the “Faith of the new Age” and sammum bonum for the modern man. It has made valuable
contribution towards the uplift of man and society in almost all spheres — thought, conduct, outlook,
otganisation and cultural pattern, etc.
“It arose, five centuries ago, as a new mode of humanitarian thought, heralding a new conception
of the Ultimate Reality, a new vision of the Universal Man, a new altruistic ideal of a democratic state, and a
new pattern of a casteless and classless society.
“Equating God with Truth and the Love of God with Service of Humanity, it urges self-realisation
and recognition of the Creator through His creation. Exhibiting a just, catholic and tolerant temperament, it
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
admits no discriminating distinction of any kind anywhere, and guarantees each individual his fundamental
right and freedom of conscience. Envisioning a new cultural ethos and an ideal social order — mental,
spiritual, physical, social and political — transcending all types of religious exclusiveness, formalism and ego-
centric individualism, it brushes aside all claims of incarnations and intermediaries, and advocates direct
communion with the Almighty.
“Sikhism gives optimistic hope of salvation for everyone, by Divine Grace, while leading a normal
householder’s life with virtuous conduct, remembering God, adoring nature, doing work, performing duties
and sharing earnings with fellow-beings, as against pursuing enforced celibacy, barren asceticism and
mortification of the human frame to attain it. It has set forth a strong moral force against the exploitation of
man by man, who, by following its tenets and traditions, neither fears nor frightens, remains stable and
steadfast in all eventualities, embodies the universal spirit of liberation and tolerance, and seeks God’s
blessings for the welfare of the whole humanity in his daily prayers. Its comopolitan outlook, liberal essence
and glorious traditions have contributed thus, significantly for its age and limitations, towards human uplift
and well-being by offering the message of good cheer for all mankind and by furthering goodwill, general
happiness and collective moral values of society, both at home and abroad, for building a new and peaceful
pluralistic world order.” (Abstract of a paper read by Prof. Dr Harnam Singh Shan at the 34th International
Congress of Asian & North African Studies held from 22nd to 28th August, 1993 at the University of Hong
Kong.)
There is no better way of closing this introduction than with Divine words from our holy scripture.
The Sikh religion, as projected in the Guru Granth Sahib is concerned with the creation of a just social order,
social equality and peaceful co-existence as proclaimed by Guru Arjun in the following words :
“Hun Hukum hua Meharvan da
pai koi na kisae ranjhan da
Sab sukhah wuthia
Eho hoa Halemi Raj jio!”
(Guru Granth Sahib, p. 74)
(The Gracious Lord has now promulgated His ordinance : None shall domineer over others or
cause pain to them. All shall abide in peace and the governance shall be gentle and compassionate.)
1, Coldstream Avenue, JUSTICE CHOOR SINGH (RETD.)
Singapore.
1st November 1996
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
A METHOD TO STUDY RELIGION
DALJEET SINGH
Comparative studies of religion are essential both for the proper appreciation of any religion and its
features, and more especially, for identifying the reasons for the wide varieties of religious doctrines and
developments in the world. No doubt, the environmental situation and the social milieu in which a religion
arises, do have their impact on its growth and the problems it seeks to tackle. Yet, it is very true that the
perceptions, the internal strength, and the ideology of a religion are fundamentally the elements that give it
substance and direction, and shape its personality.
Unless some definite principles are followed in making a comparative study of different religious
systems, confusions, misunderstandings and misinterpretations are bound to occur, in the presentation
thereof. The important thing, hence, is to identify the basic elements of religion and compare the
fundamentals and the essentials of different systems. Otherwise, mere stress on similarities or dissimilarities
only in the ancillary or peripheral features of the two or more systems could be very misleading, and give an
entirely lopsided view of the traditions concerned.
The following could be the basic elements on which it is necessary to ascertain and compare the
features of a system before arriving at any conclusion regarding its affinities, nature, class and stand.
1. THE METAPHYSICAL VIEW
While it is true that a religious system is not a philosophy, yet its metaphysical assumptions and its
view about the nature of Reality, so often determine its other basic characteristics and its approach to the
world. For example, in Yoga, Sankhya and Jainism, two kinds of Reality, material and spiritual, are assumed,
and man is a combination of both. No one basic Reality, much less a creative Reality of God, is assumed.
The logic of such dualism, therefore, involves the isolation of the spiritual monad from its connection or
combination with the material element. Thus, in each case, the ideal is of withdrawal from the world and its
activities, without any role for the ideal man. In the same manner, in the monistic system of Sankra, the
world and its activities are mithya or unreal. Therefore, monasticism or the virtual turning of one's back to the
world become necessary. Similarly, in a pantheistic system, moral life ceases to have a spiritual or primary
value. Accordingly, the metaphysical assumptions of a religious system have a significant relevance for
understanding a system and its character.
2. NATURE OF REALITY
The nature of Reality assumed by the tradition has also a crucial meaning. In case the Reality is
attributive, world activity and moral life assume a primary and spiritual significance. Similar is the importance
of the issue whether Reality is both Transcendent and Immanent. But, far more important is the assumption
whether Reality is creative or not. For, in a materialistic or deterministic system, creativity and freedom have
not much of a place, or scope.
3. REALITY OF THE WORLD
Answer to this issue makes all the difference between a system like Sankra’s Vedanta where the world
is mithya, or unreal, and a system like Sikhism or Islam, where the creation is not only real, but creative activity
in the world is essential for the spiritual growth of man. The systems of the former kind recommend
monasticism, involving withdrawal from life, whereas in the latter kind world affirmation becomes an
essential feature.
4. IS WORLD WORTHWHILE ?
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
So far as approach to the world is concerned, this is a very important issue, dividing all systems into
two categories, one of life-affirmation and the other of life-negation. For example, in Buddhism, world is a
place of suffering. Salvation lies only in Nirvana through asceticism and withdrawal from life. Moral life
could give one a better birth than before, but it could never lead to Nirvana. Similarly, in systems like Yoga,
Nathism and some categories of Satvism, world is a place of misery. In Jainism, too, world activity,
howsoever good or moral, is an involvement, and has to be given up. As against that, in Sikhism, Christianity
and Islam, creative activity in the world, or activity in carrying out the Will of God, is of the highest spiritual
significance. As such, the world is a meaningful place for spiritual endeavours. It is far from being a place of
suffering or misery, which has to be given up, or from which release has to be sought. In fact, in systems like
Sikhism, the entire growth of man and his spiritual stature are judged by the deeds performed by him in this
world. Actually, divergent answers on this issue would place two systems entirely into widely varying
categories of religions.
5. GOAL OF LIFE
For obvious reasons, the goal fixed in a religious system is of fundamental significance. For, this
determines in many ways its entire direction and world-view, its values, and its methodology and discipline.
Here, too, whatever be the apparent similarities between the two traditions, these would be meaningless, if
the systems have opposing spiritual goals. In Sikhism, the goal is to carry out, through deeds, the attributive
and creative Will of God. It can have nothing in common with a system, like Yoga or Sankhya, where no
God is assumed, and where the goal is the isolation of the spiritual element from the material element.
Actually, the spiritual goal in a religion determines not only its entire approach towards life, but also its ethics
and the role of the superman. For example, religious systems in which the goal is isolation of the spiritual
element, or merger in Reality, or even union, as an end in itself, have nothing in common with systems like
Sikhism where human duty is ever to carry out the Will of God. In each case, the endeavour or activity is
directed towards opposite ends. And this alone makes for a fundamental difference. It is the Yogic or Jainic
goal of isolation of the spiritual monad, that make asceticism and monasticism distinct features and
institutions of the Indian culture and history. And, it is these institutions that arose only in India, and are
typically Indian contribution to foreign cultures like the Egyptian, Christian, etc. For, such asceticism was
unknown to Babylonians or early Egyptians or Iranians. Hence, the importance of a goal in the study of
different religions. The influence of the goal of isolation and of asceticism and monasticism as a sequel, has
indeed, been profuse and fundamental. In contrast with it was the Vedic ideal of activity, heaven and
sacrifices under which everything in this world, and even in the next, could be sought and obtained by the
meticulous performance of rituals. Probably, as a compromise, the system of four Ashrams was devised early
in the Upanisadic times. But, this compromise remained mostly a paper ideal, and the basic dichotomy of
goals and approach continued not only to cause confusion, but also to affect adversely the religious growth,
with attendant effects, sometimes quite adverse, on the moral, social and cultural developments. Hence the
fundamental importance of the goal set in a religious system.
6. MYSTIC COMMUNION AND FACTOR OF FREEDOM
The issue of mystic communion has very great relevance for believers in and students of religion.
Scholars, especially students of anthropology, sociology and history, believing only in deterministic and
environmental philosophies and factors, are liable to make serious errors of understanding and interpretation,
if they ignore this factor of freedom or mystic communion in relation to a religious tradition, movement, or
development. Let us try to define this factor of freedom or mystic communion. Most of the traditional
religions believe that there is a higher level of Reality, different from the empirical or phenomenal reality of
which we ate a part, and which works under a logic of cause and effect. All the same, under this logic,
governing our entire rational thinking, we are unable to explain the First Cause or the Original Causeless
Cause, the Creator, or the Transcendent Reality, which is ineffable and cannot be described in terms of “Is or
Is not.” We do not know the logic governing this Reality or Consciousness, and, therefore, call it Free or
Creative, in so far as it introduces in human affairs a new element unexplained by the rational or scientific
logic of man. Mystics or prophets like Buddha, Christ, Muhammad and the Sikh Gurus have not only
asserted the existence of such a Reality, but have also claimed some kind of touch, link or communion with
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
that Reality or consciousness. Christ clearly asserts his communion with God. Buddha too claims elevation
to the state of Nirvana. The Sikh Gurus also repeatedly affirm that it is the Divine message that they have
been delivering.
But, materialistic, deterministic or behavioural philosophies do not accept such statements or claims.
This is understandable. But, it would be grossly naive to interpret the martyrdoms of Chirst and the Sikh
Gurus on the deterministic basis and ignore altogether the element of freedom and creativity in human
affairs. In fact, it is from the sacrifices of these men, that we understand and accept the value and validity of
a free, moral or creative life. Otherwise, all talk of honesty, integrity and truth would be sheer hypocrisy and
moonshine; since the realistic spectacle today is that the best of our teachers, scientists and academicians
barter away their services, without any tangible compunction or protest, to their respective national states
feverishly engaged in constructing engines of death and destruction for the rest of mankind. Against this
background, it would be almost a perversion either to dub the statements and deeds of these great martyrs as
actuated by hallucination, or determined by environmental causality. Therefore, in assessing or comparing a
religious thesis, it is important to know whether the founder of the faith claims communion with the Creative
Consciousness. While the role of men like Luther or other religious leaders could be understood or explained
by the means of environmental, deterministic factors, such an explanation would be simply incongruous
when applied to creative individuals like Christ, Buddha or the Sikh Gurus, who themselves claim touch with
Higher Reality. Therefore, religious developments initiated by the creative individuals have to be viewed and
appreciated very differently from the subsequent developments when that personality is off the stage of
history. Hence, the importance of this issue and the claims of the prophet concerned.
7. THE PATH AND PRACTICES FOR THE ACHIEVEMENT OF THE GOAL
The discipline and methods suggested for attaining the spiritual goal in any system have an obvious
relevance in any comparative study. Of course, the methods and practices prescribed are determined by the
doctrines and ideals of the system, but these certainly clarify them, as also its basic tenets, structure and
approach to social life. Religious leaders have prescribed a large number of practices and disciplines aimed at
achieving the spiritual goal. For example, methods of Yoga, asceticism, one-point concentration, etc., varying
in their rigour and duration, have been suggested. In Buddhism and Catholic Christianity, monasticism is a
recognized mode of spiritual attainments. Side by side, celibacy and withdrawal from life are also prescribed.
Ritualism and the potency and the mystic power of the recitation, or repetition of words and mantras, too, has
been deemed spiritually efficacious. Deep religious devotion, including song and dance, and the invoking of
ecstasy, are also religious practices. In a system like that of Naths and some other Saiva systems, extreme
formalism in dress and odd living, celibacy, abimsa and non-engagement in any work, are prescribed; and,
alternatively, even sensual indulgence has been recognised. As against all these methods, the emphasis in
some religions on moral deeds and carrying out the Will of God is deemed to be of primary significance and
value in the spiritual progress. In Sikhism, the greatest stress is on moral deeds, on which alone human
assessment is based. Evidently, different methodologies and spiritual practices are linked to different systems.
For, celibacy, asceticism, ritualism and monasticism have no place in a system, where the stress is on moral
deeds, leading to the spiritual development of man. So much so, that a system like Sikhism, prescribing the
medium of moral deeds as the major vehicle of spiritual progress, clearly rejects or frowns upon methods of
asceticism, ritualism or formalism. Such systems in their methodology and practices stand at opposite
extremes without any meeting ground between them. That is so in the case of Sikhism and Nathism.
Therefore, the principal modes of the discipline prescribed throw considerable light on the character, class,
ideals, and affinities of a religious system.
8. ROLE OF THE SUPERMAN
Another major issue is the role of the superman. The goal, the philosophy, its discipline and its
attitude to the world, are important distinguishing features in identifying and classifying different religious
systems. Though largely depending on the other basic characteristics of a system, the role of the superman is
a very significant point in differentiating between traditions, and understanding whether these are allied or
not. For example, in the case of systems like Yoga, Sankhya, or Jainism, the superman, once isolated, is away
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
forever from the world of man. He has, with extreme asceticism and discipline, sought and achieved his
liberation from the world. He is, therefore, not going to re-involve himself in its entanglements. The Jain
Tirthankra would not answer or respond to any prayers of men below. Similarly, in the Vedantic system,
where ‘I am Brahman’ (aham Brahm asmi) is the final stage achievement, and involvement in the relative world
of man is a fall. Once liberated, the question of return to a lower stage of development does not arise.
Hence, in this system, the liberated person ceases to have any meaningful link with the world. In systems
where the idea is merger in the Absolute, or bliss and tranquility of union with the Absolute as an end in
itself, the superman has virtually no role to play. But, the position is very different in systems where the
superman considers it his primary duty to carry out an attributive or creative role in life. For example, Guru
Nanak’s first words after his enlightenment were, “There is no Hindu, nor Mussalman.” Further he says “A
real superman is one who treats every person as his own and equal.” In his system, the important thing is
man. The superman is spontaneously benevolent, and “God showers His grace where the weak are helped.”
“He is the Shelter for the shelterless.” So is the role of the superman. In such systems, the redemption of
man is the primary concern. The sixth Guru stated that his sword is to deal with the tyrants. Obviously,
where the ideology and methodology are very different, the role of the superman after his achievement is
equally divergent in activity and direction.
9. SUPERMAN AND SOCIO-POLITICAL ACTIVITY
Different answers to this issue also sharply distinguish one religious system from the other. While
socio-political activity on the part of the superman is the logical culmination in a system where the primary
interest is in man and his future, in many religions such activity is virtually a taboo for the superman. Islam
and Sikhism are the two systems where the responsibility of socio-political life is accepted as a religious duty.
Probably, the case of Joan of Arc is the solitary example in the Christian world where a person of God has
felt compelled to enter the political field. Except, regarding caste duties, all the Indian traditions (other than
Sikhism), and to an extent even Christianity, are against it. It is for this reason that a person like Toynbee
criticizes Prophet Mohammad for taking up socio-political activity. Similarly, Tagore, Gandhi, and J.N.
Sarkar adversely comment on the role of Guru Gobind Singh. It is on account of the same background that
McLeod has failed to understand the role of the sixth to tenth Gurus, and has to raise the prop or phantom
of Jat infiltration in order to explain the militarization of the Sikh movement. The case of Buddhism and
Sikhism will clarify the issue and the sharp differences in that regard. In Buddhism, world is a place of
suffering wherein salvation could be only in Nirvana. Good deeds in this world could never lead to Nirvana,
though these could give a better birth. So much so, that, once in Nirvana, further activity is stopped. It is
only at the penultimate stage or arhat, that activity could be possible. Buddha was clearly requested to return
to his kingdom, but he declined to do so. While there is no doubt that Buddhism has a strong ethical
content, its doctrine of abimsa and world being a suffering, almost place a bar against socio-political activity by
the superman. As against it, in Sikhism, since man is the primary object of interest, as explained by the Sixth
Guru to saint Ramdas, socio-political activity becomes a logical and moral duty of every religious person. It is
on account of these fundamental differences of ideology that some historians have accused Buddhistic ahimsa
to be the cause of India’s political subjugation, and, on the other hand, others have criticized Sikh Gurus for
wrongly diverting the pure stream of religion into the muddy fields of politics. But, it is these basic
ideological differences that have led the two traditions to play distinctly divergent roles in history.
10. ETHICS
Just like the methodology and discipline, the ethics of a system is the projection and product of its
basic doctrines and ideals. For, the value system of a religion has primarily been devised to serve, aid and
help in achieving its goals. Accordingly, as there are variations in spiritual goals, there are differences in the
ethical systems. Further, religions, which do not accept any social responsibility, or are other worldly, have
ethics which is quite divergent from the one in which the love of man and love of God are almost
synonymous. Both in Yoga and Nathism, no social responsibility is accepted. Each individual has to secure
his own release from the bondage and misery of the world. In the individual’s spiritual venture, he alone has
to help himself. Not that truth and purity of conduct have no meaning, but these have no social relevance.
Therefore, the ethical systems of religions like Christianity and Yoga-Sankhya are, in many ways, quite
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
different. In Sikhism, God is the Ocean of attributes. Its ethics is basically social, because attributes have a
meaning mainly in the social field. Where God is the succour of the helpless, the seeker has necessarily to
accept social responsibility and consequently an ethics that is socially oriented. For example, the Sikh Gurus
lay down the theological doctrine of the Fatherhood of God and also the logical ethical corollaries of the
brotherhood of man and treating everyone as equal. Evidently, these corollaries are pregnantly and
emphatically social in their content. All these three concepts form a unified and integrated doctrine. No part
of it can be divorced from the other. Let us also take the example of Buddhism. According to Hinayana
Buddhism, the fate of everyone is the result of his earlier deeds, One’s blindness is due to one’s own faults. It
is a single line of ethical or moral responsibility. But, in the Mahayana, the ethical system is very different. It
involves both aggregate and individual responsibility. This acceptance of social responsibility and consequent
shift to a socially oriented ethics is evidently the result of the Boddhisatva doctrine. So much so, that the
Mahayana Buddhists, with their socially oriented ethics, their Boddhisatva doctrine, and their concept of
ageregate responsibility, call the ethics of Hinayana individualistic and selfish. And yet, with the goals set in
the Hinayana system, its ethics is perfectly logical and consonant with its doctrines and system. Hence, the
ethics of a religion, being intimately linked to its fundamentals, is very relevant and helpful in understanding
its doctrines and goals.
11. THE UNITY OF PERCEPTION, IDEOLOGY AND ACTIVITIES
In rightly understanding a religious system, and in appreciating and placing its different doctrines in
their proper perspective, it is essential to bear the unity of perception, ideology and activities in mind. Let us
first explain what we mean by the unity of perception, ideology, and activity. Almost every religion owes its
otigin to the mystic or higher religious experience of some personality or prophet. Actually, it is this
experience which forms the real fount of the entire ideology, mission and activities of the mystics. In this
sequence, the first stage is the perception or the religious experience. At the second stage, the saint, naturally,
tries to understand it, and reacts to it. This is the stage where thought appears or intervenes. This reaction
constitutes both the ideology and the proposed plan of the saint for giving practical shape to the ideology.
This ideology and plan are generally understood and interpreted by others from the words expressed, or other
means of communication resorted to by the saint. The third stage is the life actually lived by the saint. This
forms his real response to his higher religious experience, and reflects his ideology and the decisions made
thereunder. For example, if the religious experience of a mystic is that God is all love, is Shelter for the
shelterless and Help of the helpless, the mystic’s ideology is that God is the Ocean of virtues and a God of
attributes. In line with it, and as a reaction to this experience, he compulsively frames a plan of action of love
and help to the poor and the needy. Accordingly, the activities undertaken and programmes initiated and
executed by the saint are the true reflection and projection of his higher religious experience and the
consequent ideology. The Fourth Sikh Guru explains the point in a beautiful and apt simile “While
experiencing ‘You’, the ‘P is gone. The difference of ‘You’ and TP is obliterated. It is now only ‘Yow
flowing.” The activities of the saint are only the form and shape which his basic experience directs and takes.
Such mystics rarely express in words the nature of their religious experience, it being generally ineffable. And,
even if they do, the description is too inadequate to form the basis of a rational system. For the same
reasons, even the utterances and statements of these persons are not always clear, or those are too brief and
merely symbolic. In fact, these are not meant to be such; nor are these always aimed at laying a
comprehensive religious philosophy. It is in the interpretation of these statements that students of religion
and others make major errors of understanding and deduction. But, it is the deeds and activities of the
person that portray truly and directly his higher religious experience and ideology. All we seek to stress is,
first, the inalienable unity of experience, ideology and activity; and, second, the activities of the saint alone
being the right key to the understanding and appreciation of his perceptions and message. So often, mere
statements, taken in their isolation, have been wrongly interpreted, especially by those distant in time and
space. Because, howsoever, sophisticated these may be, rational tools cannot rise above the prejudices and
predilections of the person employing them.
Scholars, trained in a behaviouristic or mechanical methodology, have generally a tendency to trace
one teligious development from a preceding one. But, trying to build such a chain of ratiocination is a virtual
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
denial of the validity, the very novelty, and the free character of the religious experience. Hence, the need for
adhering to the principle of the unity of experience, ideology and activity, and of understanding and
interpreting a religious message purely from the activities of its author. Otherwise, so often students of
religion fall into the error of picking up seemingly common utterances of two teligious pioneers and then of
trying to relate them to a common source or a connecting bond. Mere words and statements unrelated to the
deeds of their author are quite likely to be misunderstood and misinterpreted. Deeds alone are the true index
of the ideology of the author.
12. THE WORLDVIEW
The worldview of a system is the best expression of its philosophy and appreciation of human
destiny, of its aims and objectives, and of the direction in which men must move. The worldview represents
the character and class of a system. Schweitzer, in his survey of different philosophical and religious systems,
classifies them broadly in two distinct categories, the one with the worldview of life-affirmation and the other
that is largely life-denying. In one case, creative and ethical participation in life is the spiritual goal. In the
other case, withdrawal from the world for merger or union with Reality is the natural aim. The broad features
of the two types of systems are quite characteristic and contrastive. In one case, moral life forms the chief
fundamental of spiritual progress. For example, Guru Nanak says that the superman is he who treats all as
his equals. In the other case, withdrawal from life, asceticism or monasticism forms an integral part of the
religious discipline. Therefore, in appreciating the meaning and import of the doctrines and practices of a
system, the context of its worldview has to be kept in view. For, each part not only reflects the other, but in
turn also determines it.
Hence, for the intrinsic understanding of the features and class of any religious system, it is
absolutely essential that the aforesaid principles, measures and methodology are constantly kept in view. Any
varied approach is bound to lead to wrong conclusions. However, for obvious reasons, many of these
principles may appear to overlap each other. This is so because, it is the components of an integrated whole
that have to be taken up individually, and features of each part noted in isolation, so as to identify the same
and the whole, in the light of the principles stated above.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
2
PROBLEMS OF METHODOLOGY
DALJEET SINGH
It is a welcome sign that in the last few decades, interest in the study of Sikh religion, its institutions
and history, has grown in India and abroad, both among Sikh and non-Sikh scholars. It is indeed a healthy
development. But, partly because of the variant background from which scholars are drawn, and partly
because of the methodologies of study followed by them, a few problems have to be faced and solved. In
this brief article, we shall consider a few of them.
The first problem that has arisen concerns the methodology adopted in the study of Sikhism. This
issue telates not only to the study of Sikhism, but also to the study of other religions, or of religion as such.
In fact, the problem is ontological in nature. It is basic to almost every religion that there is a Spiritual Reality
that is different from the empirical reality we perceive with our senses. Irrespective of the fact whether or not
the phenomenal Reality is considered to be real or not, the Spiritual Reality is regarded as more real or true.
It is the description and definition of this Reality by a religion that form the very basis of the study of that
religion. Answers to questions whether that Reality is creative, attributive or otherwise, determine the
structure of a religion, and furnish valid clues to its study and classification. For example, no student of Guru
Granth Sahib can fail to understand that for the Gurus, God is not only creative and attributive, but He is
also immanent, reveals Himself to man, and operates in history with His Will. The Gurus have repeatedly
emphasized these aspects of God. Guru Nanak says, “O Lalo, I say what the Lord commands me to
convey.”! Similarly, the scriptures and the basic doctrines of every religion define Reality in their own way,
and no study of any religion would be true or even valid, unless that definition is kept in view. It is, therefore,
axiomatic to say that the study of the ontology or the spiritual base of a religion is essential to the proper
understanding of it and its development. Yet, it is this very issue that raises the first problem.
Since the advent of science, and more particularly since the last century, materialistic philosophies
have gained considerable relevance. In fact, in the fields of sociology, economics, political science,
psychology and history, it is the materialistic interpretations that are, by and large, accepted as valid. Each of
these social sciences has developed its own particular discipline and methodology of study. As all these
studies relate to the phenomena of the empirical world, either taking little account of or denying the
transcendent world, their world-views are, from the point of view of religion, partial or lopsided. Seen from
the angle of social sciences, there is substance in the argument of these scholars of phenomenology, that the
acceptance of the existence of transcendence is an uncalled for assumption that would knock off what they
consider to be their scientific basis. The argument has a validity in the field from which it emanates. But, the
confusion and the fallacy arise, when this argument is carried to the field of religion. For, by its very
definition, the study of religion involves the study of the transcendent or the spiritual. Therefore, in the study
of religion it would be an equally uncalled for assumption to accept that there is no transcendent element.
For, many a religion believes that the transcendent is also immanent, and operates in history. Accordingly,
religion has developed its own methodology and principles of study leading to a world-view which is holistic
and comprehensive, instead of being limited and narrow. In fact, the denial of the spiritual element would
not only vitiate the study of religion, but would also rule out the very meaning or need of such a study. It is
in this context that we quote Dr Hannad Arenett, who after invoking the age-old view of Parmenides and
Plato about the existence of the super sensual world, writes, “Meanwhile, in increasingly strident voices, the
few defenders of metaphysics have warned us of the danger of nihilism inherent in the development; and
although they themselves seldom invoke it, they have an important argument in their favour; it is indeed true
that once the super sensual realm is discarded, its opposite, the world of appearances as understood for so
many centuries, is also annihilated. The sensual, as still understood by positivists, cannot survive the death of
the super sensual. No one knew this better than Nietzsche, who, with his poetic and metaphoric description
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
of the assassination of God in Zarathustra, has caused so much confusion in these matters. In a significant
passage in The Twilight of Idols, he clarifies what the word God meant in Zarathustra. It was merely a symbol
for the super sensual realm as understood by metaphysics; he now uses instead of God the word ‘true world’
and says : “We have abolished the true world. What has remained? The apparent one perhaps? Oh no! with
the true world we have also abolished the apparent one.”’? It is obvious that the study of religion, its
institutions and history cannot be kept limited to the study of its phenomena, because such a study, in order
to be complete, must essentially embrace the study both of its spiritual and empirical aspects. In this context
Dr Huston Smith writes, “Ninian (Smart) approaches religion from the angle of phenomenology and the
social sciences, whereas I, a philosopher, find phenomenology confining. Ontology is too central to be
993
bracketed.
This observation is particularly valid in the case of the study of a religion like Sikhism, in which the
Gurus establish an inalienable link between the spiritual life and the empirical life of man. In fact,
transcendence is fundamental. Every couplet in the over fourteen hundred pages in Guru Granth Sahib
stresses that there is a higher level of Reality than the physical reality we perceive with our senses, and, unless
we work in tune with that Reality, our problems of conflict, disharmony and war will remain unsolved. The
Guru clearly envisages four stages in the progress of life after God had expressed Himself. “First, He
manifested Himself; second, He created the individuality; third, He created multifarious entities; and fourth is
the highest level of the God-conscious being who always lives truthfully.”4 And, it is this destiny of man, the
Guru exhorts him to fulfill. “O man, you are supreme in God’s creation, now is your opportunity, you may
ot may not fulfill your destiny.”> This is the Guru’s thesis in Guru Granth Sahib. According to it, real
knowledge comes from the area of the transcendent. He is the Teacher who enlivens man’s spiritual
dimension and gives him a universal consciousness and a discriminatory vision. This realm is noetic. It was
the knowledge thus gained that made Guru Nanak change radically almost every religious doctrine that stood
accepted in the earlier three thousand years of Indian history. Against the world being illusory, delusive
(mithya, maya) or a place of suffering or misery, he called it real and meaningful; against asceticism,
monasticism and sanyasa, he accepted the householdet’s life and full social participation and responsibility;
against celibacy and woman being considered sin-born, he gave religious sanctity to marriage and equality to
women with men; against the rigidity of Varn Ashram Dharma and the institutions of caste and pollution, he
stated that yoga lies not in one-point meditation but in treating all men as one’s equal; against withdrawal
from life and taking to renunciation and sanyasa, he stressed that he alone knows the true way who works and
shares his earnings with others. For the social milieu of that period, this was a very radical thesis. And, yet,
scholars employing the methodology and tools of social sciences say : Guru Nanak contributed no new
religious thought; that Sikhism is hardly a religion; it is a combination of Vaishnaism and Nathism, two cults
recommending celibacy and withdrawal from life, and accepting caste discrimination; or that it is a peasant
faith. For the Guru, God is the source of truth, knowledge and energy; that way alone can we explain the
revolutionary activities of Muhammad and Guru Nanak. That is why in Christianity, Islam and Sikhism, God
is given the symbol of Light, and in Islam and Sikhism, He is called “Truth.” For the man of faith, the door
to truth is through the spiritual dimension of man. For the social sciences, the only reality is the physical
world, and science constitutes the exclusive door to its secrets, the mystic world being just unexplored areas
of darkness. But, for Guru Nanak, unless man wakens his spiritual dimension, he cannot know reality nor
live a truthful and harmonious life in this world; for, spirituality forms the base of all moral life. Schweitzer,
while surveying the entire field of Western thought, comes to the dismal conclusion that there is no trace of
the ethical in the reflective thought of man. That is why, for the social sciences, morality is just ‘a defence
mechanism’ or a ‘reaction formation’ in response to environmental impacts; religion too, being a similar
behavioral phenomenon without any separate or independent roots.
It is in this context that William Nicholls feels that the culture and consciousness of the modern
secular universities are unsuitable to interpret the culture and consciousness of the authors of Scriptures, “In
so far as we adopt the culture of the secular university, we are systematically in opposition to the texts we are
studying. In so far as we take our text seriously, and are successful in interpreting the intention of their
wiiters, we are in opposition to the university and its culture.” Nicholls cites the following typical case of
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
distortion by Morton Smith, who is blind to the colossal spiritual energies generated by Christ and the
phenomenal response he had over the centuries in shaping history and men. “A striking example of this
limitation may be observed in the work of one of the most brilliant and respected of present-day scholars,
Morton Smith. His recent book, The Secret Gospel, begins as a piece of literary detection which compels
admiration, but it takes a startling nosedive at the point that it comes to the historical substance of the matter.
On the basis of a second century source of doubtful provenance, which he prefers to more central sources,
on no other apparent ground than that it was secret, Smith believes he has unmasked the truth about Jesus —
he was really a magician, and perhaps one who used homosexual practices in his rites of initiation. The fact
that this theory is shocking to the susceptibilities of the believer is not an argument against its truth. After all,
many simple Christians will be most disturbed by the growing consensus of scholarship that Jesus was
thoroughly Jewish, and had no thought of founding a new religion. What is more to the point is the total
inability of such a theory to explain how such a person could also have been the originator of the lofty
spiritual teachings to which both the Gnostic and ecclesiastical traditions bear witness.””’ What needs to be
emphasised is that religious phenomena or history is intimately related to, if not the product and expression
of, its spiritual base. Both components have to be studied together, one cannot be fruitfully studied in
isolation of the other. No wonder Nicholls writes, “Thus, it can seem somewhat ludicrous to watch scholars
in religious studies abdicating a function they alone can perform, and bowing down to the latest theories in
anthropology, which seem unable to recognize in religion anything beyond a highly abstract code for ordering
data and uniting and separating bits of information. Even if it has to be acknowledged that religions may
perform such functions, to suppose that this exhausts their role, is to betray a crass failure to enter the
outlook of other human beings, for whom religion was, and perhaps still is, a living reality opening doors on
to the spiritual dimension and raising their existence to a higher level.”
We do not say that an anthropologist or sociologist should not study religion, but it would only be an
anthropologist’s or sociologist’s view of religion by the use of his own methodology. Whereas the
anthropologist is entitled to express his point of view about a religion, the reader is also equally entitled to
know that the study is by an anthropologist by the use of an anthropologist’s methodology. Because, from
the point of view of the man of religion, such studies would be limited in their scope, partial in their vision,
and inadequate as a study of man in the totality of his being and functioning, Le., of his spiritual and empirical
life. Perhaps, it is the limitation of the social science methodology, that scholars from this field have either
scanty knowledge of the ideology of Guru Granth Sahib or are unwilling to take its contribution into account.
There is also another related point. In the study of religion it is not only necessary to know the
methodology the author is using, but it is important to know who the writer is, and what is his own faith or
training. Unlike as in science, religion is the study of the inner life of man. It is, therefore, relevant and
necessary to know about the religious belief and background of the writer, i.e., whether or not he accepts the
existence of the transcendent or the super sensual elements. It is in this context that Dr Noel Q. King writes,
“One general conclusion which I draw from a long study of the critics, of which the above is a sketch, is that
it is most important to remember the personality and circumstance of the critic. In a natural science like
chemistry it may not be necessary to know anything about the human being who is writing. In any subject
which entails human beings, the work must be put into a personal context. Accordingly, one feels that every
such work of critical scholarship should have a government statutory warning that its consumption may be
deleterious to the soul’s health. If it is to do with religion, it should also have a statement of ingredients,
including the religious standing of the writer. If he or she is a believer, it is necessary to know this, so that the
critical reader can allow for bias. If he or she is not a believer, we should have some indication of that too,
lest the disillusionment or enlightenment of a post-Christian, a post-Jew or a post-whatever should give the
critic rosy-colored spectacles or a jaundiced outlook.’’? Let us now quote C.G. Jung about objectivity of
Sigmund Freud, “There was no mistaking the fact that Freud was emotionally involved in his sexual theory to
an extraordinary degree. When he spoke of it, his tone became urgent, almost anxious, and all signs of his
normally critical and skeptical manner vanished. A strange, deeply moved expression came over his face, the
cause of which I was at a loss to understand. I had a strong intuition that for him sexuality was a sort of
numinosum. This was confirmed by a conversation which took place some three years later (in 1910), again in
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Vienna. I can still recall vividly how Freud said to me, ‘My dear Jung, promise me never to abandon the
sexual theory. That is the most essential thing of all. You see, we must make a dogma of it, an unshakable
bulwark.’ He said that to me with great emotion, in the tone of a father saying, ‘And promise me this one
thing, my dear son, that you will go to church every Sunday.”!? It is strange that Freud, who was basing his
theories on, and interpreting the dreams of others, including those of Jung, was, curiously enough, anxious to
conceal his own and his private life. The motive for such concealment could hardly be academic or scientific.
Jung writes, “Freud had a dream — I would not think it right to air the problem it involved. I interpreted it
as best I could, but added that a great deal more could be said about it, if he would supply me with some
additional details from his private life. Freud’s response to these words was a curious look — a look of the
utmost suspicion. Then he said, ‘But I cannot risk my authority.’ At that moment he lost it altogether. That
sentence burned itself into my memory; and in it the end of our relationship was already foreshadowed.
Freud was placing personal authority above truth.’””!!
We quote the instance of another great man. It is well-known that the followers of Ramanuja, a
philosopher of Bhakti, are very particular that the food they eat is undefiled. Therefore, the rule had been
that if while cooking or eating food, another person cast a glance on it, the entire food was thrown away, and
the food cooked again and eaten. This being the Vaishnava culture, let us record what Mahatma Gandhi, a
protagonist of the Hindu tradition, writes, “...... but for years I have taken nothing but fruit in Mohammedan
ot Christian households ...... In my opinion, the idea that interdining and intermarrying is necessary for
national growth is a superstition borrowed from the West. Eating is a process just as vital as the other
sanitary necessities of life. And if mankind had not, much to its harm, made of eating a fetish and an
indulgence, we would have performed the operation of eating in private, even as we perform other necessary
functions of life in private. Indeed, the highest culture in Hinduism regards eating in that light, and there are
thousands of Hindus still living who will not eat their food in the presence of anybody.” It is not our object
to deride anyone, but we wish only to show that cultural or personal prejudices die hard, and that these
consciously or unconsciously color one’s vision. It cannot, thus, be denied that in the study of a religion or
another religion, objectivity of vision can, at best, be only limited. It is, therefore, essential to know of the
background, beliefs and predilections of the author in order to enable the reader to assess and appreciate the
value of his views and the slant of his vision. In scientific studies, the data and facts are mechanical,
quantitative and special, that are generally measurable by fixed and accepted yardsticks. Even in that field, we
have come to a stage where the observer’s relative position in space and time affects his measurement and
inferences. In the matter of religion, the difficulties of unbiased assessment ate far too great, because here
the field of study is primarily the emotional, the moral and the spiritual life of an individual or his society. An
illustration would be relevant. Two ideas are intimately connected with the martyrdom of Chirst, namely, that
of the act of redemption and of the resurrection of Christ. Howsoever one may view these ideas, it would,
indeed, be impossible to understand and interpret the moral base and development of Christianity without
accepting their validity, the deep faith and response they inspired, and the abiding influence they exercised on
the early Christian society. In the same way, it is fundamental to the Sikh religion, as stated by Guru Nanak
and the other Gurus in their hymns, that God had revealed Himself to them and that their hymns embody
the commands of God. Therefore, in spiritual matters the genuineness of an idea is indicated by the spiritual
and moral faith it evokes in the hearts of the people concerned. We do not urge that a sociologist or an
anthropologist be debarred from evaluating religious matters and developments. But, the man of faith has
also the right to know the writer’s belief, i.e, whether he is an atheist, a materialist, an evolutionist, a Marxist
ot a sociologist. We shall specify our point still further. W.H. McLeod, while evaluating the originality of the
religious thesis of Guru Nanak, writes that it is misleading to suggest that he originated a school of thought or
a set of teachings.!3 As against it, Dr Muhammad Iqbal, the Muslim philosopher and scholar, finds in the
entire panorama of Indian religious history only two tall persons, namely, Lord Buddha and Guru Nanak.'4
These contrasted assessments might be explained by the fact that whereas McLeod was for many years a part
of a local Christian missionary organization in the Punjab, for Muhammad Iqbal, Guru Nanak is the only man
of God in India, who like Prophet Muhammad, combined the spiritual life and the empirical life of man, and
started a religion of ‘deed’, proclaiming and preaching the Oneness of God and the brotherhood of man.
Another student of cultural history, H.S. Oberoi, views Islam and Sikhism in an altogether different light.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
“Sikh religion is first and foremost a peasant faith. Sociologists have often spoken of how Islam is an urban
religion, Sikhism may be spoken of as a rural religion. When dealing with the beliefs, rituals and practices of
the Sikhs, be they religious or political, it is always worthwhile to constantly remind ourselves that we are
fundamentally dealing with the peasantry, and the world-view of this social class has historically always been
very different from other social classes. A lot of knotty issues to do with Sikh studies would become easier to
solve if we stop applying paradigms that have developed out of the study of urban social groups —
merchants, middle-class or city workers — and deploy concepts that relate to the day-to-day life of the
peasantry.’’!5
In the above context, two points can hardly be overemphasized, namely, what is the methodology of
study a scholar is using, and what are his personal belief and background, i.e., whether the study, examination
ort interpretation is under the discipline of sociology, anthropology or religion.
Next is the issue of breaking the dichotomy between the spiritual life and the empirical life of man.
In most religions, for one reason or the other, this dichotomy exists; and it is more so in the Indian religions
in which asceticism, monasticism, celibacy and ahimsa are almost the essential features of the religious life. In
India, Guru Nanak was the first person to break this dichotomy, and proclaim a religion of life-affirmation,
with emphasis on the moral life of man. Monasticism, asceticism and celibacy had become such essential
symbols of religious life that the Naths questioned Guru Nanak how he was claiming to follow the religious
path while living the life of a householder. Similar doubt was expressed by Sant Ram Das of Maharashtra,
when he found the Sixth Guru riding a horse armed like a warrior. The Guru’s reply was clear and categoric.
He said that Guru Nanak had given up mammon but had not withdrawn from the world, and that his sword
was for the defence of the weak and the destruction of the tyrant. In short, it is the Sikh doctrine of mri and
piri, which looks odd to votaries of pacifist religions. Outside India, Moses and Prophet Muhammad broke
this dichotomy and created religious societies that not only sought to tackle the socio-political problems of
man, but also sanctioned the use of force for a moral purpose. On account of this difference between the
pacifist and non-pacifist religions and the consequent differences in conditioning by the respective traditions,
persons like Toynbee are critical of the socio-political activities of Prophet Muhammad, and Indians like
Mahatma Gandhi, Rabindra Nath Tagore and Jadunath Sircar are critical of the militancy of Guru Gobind
Singh. In contrast, we have already quoted the eulogy of Muhammad Iqbal in admiration of the lofty
religious proclamation Guru Nanak made in India. Similarly, it was Pir Buddhu Shah, a Muslim Sufi saint,
who was so inspired by Guru Gobind Singh, that he not only sent his followers and sons to fight for the
cause of the Guru, but two of his sons actually sacrificed their lives while fighting in the army of the Guru.
The annals of man hardly record another instance of this kind where a saint of a living religion should
sacrifice his sons for the cause of a man of God of a different religious faith, especially while his co-religionist
should be the ruling Emperor of the day. We, therefore, wish to emphasise that scholars drawn from the
pacifist cultural background so often fail to understand that the Guru Nanak — Guru Gobind Singh
combination, or the doctrine of mwii-piri and the saint-soldier, logically follow from the ideology of Guru
Nanak that combines the spiritual life and the empirical life of man. This is exactly the reason why, despite
the ideological basis explained by the Sixth Guru himself, scholars, with pacifist background, try to find
extraneous but fantastic reasons for militancy on the part of the Sikh Gurus while pursuing a righteous cause.
This is what some Western scholars write, “The indigenous elements in Sikhism are largely those customs of
the tribes of Jats, who made Sikhism their own, and the marginal elements are those of the Nath Yogi
tradition, which with Vaishnava Bhakti was primarily responsible for the Sant synthesis.”!© “The teachings of
Nanak do not have a direct causal connection with the later growth ...... which should be understood largely
in terms of the historical events of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.”!’ Little do these scholars
realize or understand that tribal traits of character have never given rise to new religious ideologies. It is a
significant fact of modern scholarship that whereas not a single Muslim scholar finds the least discontinuity
between the ideology of the first Gurus and the later Gurus, it is only some scholars drawn from the pacifist
traditions that discern any discordance between the ideology of Guru Nanak and that of Guru Gobind Singh.
And, since both in India and the West most of the scholars are drawn from and are conditioned by the
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
pacifist background and traditions, this is the second problem concerning Sikh studies. Of course, there are
numerous scholars who are able to take an over-all view.
Partly related to the first two problems is the third issue arising from the increasing secularization of
modern life. For the last over two centuries religion has been virtually excluded from the socio-political life
of the Western countries. The position in the Communist countries is also the same. Keeping the danger of
secularism in view, the representatives of North American Churches suggested : “The American view was
that there are three realities : Christianity, other religions, and secularism, and that these three realities can be
either allies or enemies. It was argued that Christians had to choose whether they were to ally themselves
with the other religions against secularism. The Americans, especially the Boston Personalists who were
leading the debate at that time, took the view that secularism is a common danger for all religions and,
therefore, there must be an alliance of all religions to fight secularism. European theologians, particularly
Barth, Brunner, and Kramer, took a totally different view. They maintained that secularization, not
secularism, is the primary process. It is a process in which some of the values of Christian faith have been
put into a secular framework, bringing about a powerful force which is destroying all old ideas.’’'8
Unfortunately, this majority view still persists in the World Council of Churches.
The tise of the modern national state is something which Toynbee laments : “This transfer of
allegiance from the Western Christian Church to parochial Western secular states, was given a positive form
— borrowed from the Graeco-Roman Civilization — by the Renaissance.” “On this political plane, the
Renaissance revived the Graeco-Roman worship of parochial states as goddesses.” “This unavowed worship
of parochial states was by far the most prevalent religion in the western world in A.D. 1956.”!9 This has led
to a contradiction. For, where there is a war between two national states, the churches of the opposing states
pray to God for the victory of their own state, thereby bringing into ridicule the very institution of religion
and the Church. We have already stated that in Sikhism the integral combination of the spiritual life and the
empirical life of man has led to the doctrine of wii and pir. But, an outsider while reading a paper at an
academic conference on Hindu and Sikh religions views the issue quite differently. He says, “Sikh scholars
see the (miri-piri) concept as an inseparable whole in the religious order. Non-Sikhs have come to see a
religion-politics linkage in Sikhism, and deduce (or adduce) the root cause of the current crisis in Punjab to
this.”20 Another scholar is critical of Sikhs for their anxiety to maintain a separate religious identity. He
writes : “But when it comes to the Indians belonging to religions which originated within India, such as
Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs, many a Hindu regard them as downright unpatriotic or unspiritual or both, if they
wish to maintain their distinct identity from the Hindus.”’*! In a similar strain, another scholar questions the
relevance and role of religion in the field of social reform or justice. He writes, “Untouchability has been
abolished by political legislation. Government steps are persistently being taken to uplift the castes
considered backward so far. As such, the very point against which original Sikhism had reacted, no longer
remains a point of contention. Moreover, the problem of social inequality and the consequent demand for
justice no longer remains a province of religious organization. It is the government agencies who have to
look into the problem in order to eradicate social inequality and provide social justice. As such, the problem
has shifted its locale from the religious to the political.”
We have given the above examples to indicate that men of religion feel that in view of the growing
secularization of modern life and a consequent tendency to encroach on the religious field, it is not only
necessary that religion should be studied with the tools of its own discipline, but that the funding and
functioning of such academic studies should also be kept free from the influences of the modern state and its
secular life.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
REFERENCES
. Guru Granth Sahib, p. 722.
. Smith, Huston : paper entitled, Another World to Live In, Published in Religious Studies & Theology
Vol. 7, Number 1, January 87, p. 54.
. Smith, Huston : Beyond The Post Modern Mind, pp. 77-79.
. Guru Granth Sahib, p. 113.
» Ibid. p13:
. Nicholls, William : paper entitled, Spirituality and Criticism in The Hermeneutics of Religion, presented at
Annual Meeting of the Canadian Society for the Study of Religion, Guelph, Ont., May, 84, p. 4.
. Ibid., p. 32.
. Ibid., p. 22.
. King, N.Q. : Perspectives on Sikh Tradition, edited by Gurdev Singh, pp. 46-47.
. Jung, C.G. : Memories, Dreams and Reflections, p. 150.
. Ibid., p. 158.
. Baig, M.R.A.: The Muslim Dilemma In India, p. 60.
. McLeod, W.H. : Evolution of Sikh Community, p. 5.
. Muhammad Iqbal : Bang-i-Dara, p. 270.
. Oberoi, HS. : Popular Saints, Goddesses, Village Sacred Sites : Re-reading Sikh Experience in the Nineteenth
Century, p. 28. Paper read at Conference at Berkeley in Feb. 87.
. McLeod, W.H. : Evolution of Sikh Community, p. 67.
. Juergensmeyer and Barrier : Berkeley, Sikh Studies, p. 19.
. Paulos Markgegorios, in Dialogue and Alhance, International Religious Foundation Vol. I & II, 1987, p. 95.
. Toynbee, A. : An Historian’s Approach to Religion, p. 210.
. Theological and Socal Issues in Hindu € Sikh Traditions, Council of World’s Religions — Seminar held at
Srinagar in July, 88, paper by V.N. Narayanan, p. 5.
. Ibid., paper by Ravi Ravinder, p. 7.
. Ibid., paper by Basant Kumar Lal, p. 8.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
3
SIKHISM : BASIC ELEMENTS
DALJEET SINGH
1. CONCEPT OF GOD
At the very outset we should like to say one thing. Obviously, it is not possible to deal with all
aspects of Sikhism in this chapter. We shall, therefore, confine ourselves only to the essentials of Sikhism,
and highlight only those aspects of it that clarify and underline the point of view which we wish to express.
The Sikh Gurus are uncompromising monotheists. In the very opening line of Guru Granth Sahib,
God is described by Guru Nanak as “By the Grace of the Sole One, Self-existent and Immanent, the Creator
Person, without Fear or Unconditioned, without enmity or Un-contradicted, the Timeless Person, Un-
incarnated, Self-created and Enlightener.” [1. p. 1]. God is never born. The becoming world is His creation,
and not his emanation; nor is it identical with Him.
We shall first indicate, briefly, the kind of God that is envisaged in Sikhism. In their hymns the
Gurus described God in numerous ways, referring to His social, political, aesthetic, metaphysical, ethical and
other attributes. But a few aspects of God need particular mention. These will enable us to understand the
significance, origin and objectives of the Sikh tradition, institutions and practices.
(i) Creator: God is the Creator. The universe is His creation. The very concept of a Creator-God
implies a universe as different from Him. The universe is in time and space. It is changing and is governed
by fixed laws. The Creator is different from the creation, which is limited and conditioned. As Creator, God
is Free. He is not determined by any laws known to us. He is not the material cause of the universe. But, no
independent Prakriti is assumed “God created the world of life, planted Naam Immanent God) therein, and
made it the seat of righteousness.” [1. p. 930]. “He creates all, fills all, and is yet separate.” [1. p. 937]. There
are many hymns in Guru Granth Sahib which mention that God was there even before He created the
universe, He being Transcendent. “He is the Sole-creator. There is no second one.” [1. pp. 11-12]. “God
was by Himself and there was nothing else.” “In the region of Truth, God creates perpetually, and watches
His creation with a Benevolent eye. He is happy about it, and deliberates over it, directing it with His Will.”
[1. p. 8]. God is Ever-Creative.
This gives an idea of God, His creative activity, and the cosmological aspect of His creation.
(it) Transcendent and Immanent: God is both Transcendent and Immanent. He is both in the universe
and outside it. While time, space and change are features of the becoming universe, God is Eternal, Self-
existent. He cannot be conceived or explained in empirical terms. He is beyond space and beyond time. The
Gurus have cautioned us against the inadequacy of human logic to comprehend Him. He is Entirely
Different, or ‘Wholly Other.’ “When there was no form in sight, how could there be good or bad actions.
When God was in the Self-Absorbed state, there could be no enmity or conflict.” [1. p. 290]. That state of
God is to be envisaged in terms of spacelessness and timelessness. The nature of God transcends all known
categories of thought. The Creator of these limited categories cannot be judged by them. The Gurus call
Him Unfathomable, Indescribable and Ineffable. “The mind alone can know Him.” [1. p. 612]. He is
Transcendent.
The Immanent aspect of God has been variously described as His Will that directs the universe, His
Word that informs the universe, and His Naam that not only creates the entire universe but also sustains and
governs it. “God creates the universe, takes His abode in it and sustains it.” [1. p. 788]. God creates the
universe and becomes Immanent in it, being at the same time Transcendent. “He that permeates all hearts is
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Transcendent too.” [1. p. 294]. “Having created the world, He stands in the midst of it and is
separate too.” —[1. p. 937]. This Immanence of God is only a symbolic way of expressing God’s connection
with the world. When the world was not there the question of His Immanence did not arise. When “there
was no form, the Word (Immanence) in essence abided in the Transcendent God.” [1. pp. 945-6].
The Immanence of God is important. It emphasizes the spiritual and meaningful character of the
universe and life’s capacity for relationship with God. His Immanence indicates God’s Love for His creation.
This Immanence gives relevance, authenticity, direction and sanction to the entire moral and spiritual life of
man. It also emphasizes God’s capacity for revelation, His nearness to man and His deep and abiding interest
in the world. All theistic systems assume His Immanence. For, where God is only Transcendent and
unapproachable, all moral and spiritual life would become pointless.
God’s being both Transcendent and Immanent, does not mean that there are two parts, stages, or
phases of God. It is the Transcendent God who is everywhere in each heart, place and particle. It is He who
is both Transcendent and Immanent. “The same God is Sargun and Nirgun, Nirankar and self-Absorbed (Sun
Samadhi).” (1. p. 290). “Sargun and Nirgun are created by Naam.” [1. p. 387]. “He is the One, both Nérgun
and Sargun.” [1. p. 250]. The Gurus repeatedly emphasise that He is One and we only give Him
different names. It would be highly inappropriate to confuse the Gurus’ concept of Sargun and Nirgun (One
Transcendent cum Immanent God) with the Vaishnava meaning of these terms or with the idea of Ishvara.
These Vaishnava concepts of phases, or stages, have been clearly repudiated by the Gurus’ concept of One
God.
(itl) God Of Altributes : The Gurus call God the ‘Ocean of Attributes, Values and Virtues.’ This
aspect of God is of importance in indicating the spiritual and moral trends and the character of Sikhism. A
God of Attributes lays down the ideals for which man has to work. Its significance has often been missed.
“He is always Benevolent.” “You are my Mother, You are my Father, You are my Protector everywhere.”
“He relieves the sufferings of the downtrodden; He is the Succor of the succor-less.” [1. pp. 263-4]. “God is
eyes to the blind, riches to the poor, Nanak, He is the Ocean of Virtues.” [1. p. 830].
This Attributive aspect of God not only links God with the universe, but it establishes beyond doubt
the character and direction of God’s Will. This leads to four important conclusions. First, attributes and
values have relevance only in a becoming or relative world. Because all perfection is static and all qualities are
relative. A God of Attributes has, thus, a meaning only in relation to the changing world of man. Evidently,
for the expression of attributes, a changing universe is essential and becomes an integral part of the creative
plan of God. God and the universe are, thus, closely linked. It is impossible to think of a God of Attributes
in the absence of a changing world. That is why when God was all by Himself, the question of ‘Love and
devotion or good or bad actions’, [1. pp. 1035-6] could not arise. Secondly, and this is the most important
inference, virtues and attributes emphatically indicate, apart from the standard of ethical values and moral life,
the direction in which spiritual efforts should be made. These point out the purposes for which the Will of
God works. Thirdly, it indicates the continuing interest of God in man and the universe. This gives
authenticity to life and the universe which is as we shall see, decried or downgraded in many other religious
traditions. In addition, there is the benevolent character of God. Not only is He the Creator and Sustainer of
life. He nurtures and develops it with loving care. He has also been called the Enlightener (Guru or Guide)
of man. “He rewards your efforts and acknowledges your deeds.” “God rewards all efforts to become
divine.” [1. p. 859]. It gives a pre-eminent meaning to life, and optimism, hope and confidence to man in the
achievement of his ideals. Man is given a clear direction in which he should move. In addition, he also
knows that there is some one to guide and help him with love. Lastly, it gives primary validity and spiritual
sanction to the moral life of man. For, in many other systems, it is deemed to be an entanglement. At best,
some systems accept it as the preparatory method of purity for the spiritual life to be attained. But, in Sikh
theology, this attributive aspect of God gives a cleat priority, primacy and spiritual character to the moral life
of man. This is the reason that in Sikhism moral life is of basic importance both for the seeker and the
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
gurmukh. For, if God is the helper of the weak and the ocean of virtues, the spiritual person has to shape
himself likewise.
(tv) God Has A Will: Everything is governed by His Will. “Everything happens within the ambit of
His Will.” [1. p. 1]. A God of Will naturally pre-supposes that He wants the universe to move not chaotically
but in a system and with a purpose. Just like the Attributes of God, God’s Will, too, can be exercised only in
a changing world and towards a goal. The very idea of a Will implies a direction and an aim. This, too, re-
emphasizes the same points as stated in regard to a God of Attributes. The direction is governed by the
Attributes of God and the purpose, as we shall see later, is to evolve a higher consciousness in man. This
concept is central to Sikh theology. But, a God of Will does not at all mean a predeterministic world, because
God is Creative and Free; and all movement in life is towards a creative freedom.
(v) God Does Not Incarnate: God has been mentioned as One who never takes birth, nor takes form.
“May that mouth burn which says that God has incarnated.” [1. p. 1136]. “God alone is the One who is not
born of a woman.” [1. p. 473]. The Gurus have definitely decried belief in the theory of incarnation. In
order to dispel such ideas, they have stated that He created countless Brahmas, Sivas and Vishnus. “The
Formless, One, alone, Nanak, is without fear; many are Ramas as the dust of His feet, and many Krishnas.
Many are their stories and many are the Vedas.” [1. p. 464] The idea that God never takes the human form
has distinct implications. First, it shows that God is ‘Wholly Other.’ For a God that is Transcendent and
unknowable, the question of His taking human form does not arise. Secondly, all pantheistic implications, as
flowing from the idea of incarnation, are ipso facto repudiated. Besides, the concept has three other corollaries
too.
The first is that man can never become God, and that God and man are not identical. Secondly, it
indicates that the aim of spiritual effort is not merger in God, as under some other systems, but to be in tune
with Him. This has a crucial significance in determining the human goal, and in showing that the entity of
man is distinct from that of God. The two can never be one, though man can be His instrument. Thirdly, it,
inter alia, shows that spiritual activity does not stop after the final achievement. The superman has a role to
perform in carrying out the Will of God. Consequently, so long as the universe is there and the Will of God
is in operation, the activities and duties of the superman continue endlessly.
(vi) God Of Grace: God has been called Gracious and Enlightener. A God of Will and a God of
Grace have a meaning only in a becoming world, wherein alone, His Grace and Will can operate. These
aspects of God also emphasise His Personal character. Grace implies that God’s Will is free, undetermined
by any outside law. In addition, it also stresses Love and Benevolence of God towards man. For, a Gracious
Being can bestow His Grace only on something other than Himself. It has been repeatedly stressed that all
final approval of man is an act of God’s Grace. “O Nanak, the intellect is of no avail, one is approved only
by His Grace.” [1. p. 467]. A God of Grace dispels the idea that the world is deterministic. His activity is,
therefore, incomprehensible except in terms of His Grace or Freedom.
(vit) Naam: The Sikh Gurus have given the word Naam, a distinct and significant meaning, which is
far different from that of the mere ‘Naaw’ or psychic factors as understood in the traditional literature.
“Naam sustains all regions and universes, all thought, knowledge and consciousness, all skies and stars, all
forces and substances, all continents and spheres...... He, on whom is His Grace, is yoked to Naam and he
reaches the highest state of development.” [1. p. 284]. “Naam is the Creator of everything.” “Naam gives
form to everything, and through Naam comes all Wisdom or Light.” [1. p. 946]. Naam is the ‘Nine Treasures’
and nectar (amit).
From the above verses it is clear that the Gurus do not use the word Naam in any restrictive or
limited sense. They refer to it as the Highest Power : creating, informing, supporting and working the entire
universe. The highest state of man is mentioned as the one when he lives and works in tune with God or
Naam. Therefore, God and Naam are Real, Eternal and Unfathomable. It means that God and Naam are one
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
and the same. Naam may be called the immanent or the qualitative aspect of God, working and directing the
manifest world of force and form.
2. THE WORLD
Sikhism proclaims the dynamic reality and authenticity of the world and life. “God created the world
of life and planted Naam therein, making it the place of righteous activity.” [1. p. 930]. “God created the
world and permeated it with His Light.” [1. p. 1304] Since Naam has not only created the world but is also
supporting, controlling and directing it, the same cannot be unreal or fruitless. His Immanence in this world
guarantees its being a place of righteous action. “True are Thy worlds and Thy universe; true are the forms
Thou createst. True are Thy deeds.” [1. p. 463]. “True is He, True is His Creation.” [1. p. 294].
The world being real, creative work and virtuous deeds are of fundamental importance. “The Guru
contemplates God by word, thought and deed.” “Earth is the true abode of righteousness.” [1. p. 785].
“Truth and continence are true deeds, not fasting and rituals.” [1. p. 841]. “Good, righteousness, virtue and
the giving up of vice are the way to realize the essence of God.” [1. p. 418].
The above quotations affirm unambiguosly the reality and significance of human life. Practices
involving direct or indirect rejection of life have been denounced. There is a hymn in Guru Granth Sahib by
Farid which would seem to suggest that the world is not real or is a place of suffering. While recording it in
Guru Granth Sahib, the Fifth Guru has introduced, along with it, another hymn of his own. It is a
clarification to dispel the contrary impression. He writes, “Beauteous, O Farid, are the garden of earth and
the human body.” [1. p. 1382]. The Guru further states, “Deride not the world as it is the creation of God.”
[1. p. 611].
This emphatic assertion about the reality of the world is a clear departure from the Indian religious
tradition. The Gurus were extremely conscious of this radical and fundamental change they were making.
That is why, both in their lives and in their hymns, they have been laying stress on this aspect of their spiritual
thesis, lest they should be misunderstood on this basic issue. Living in this world is not a bondage for them
but a rare opportunity. Not only is God benevolently developing and guiding the world in which He is
Immanent, but each one of us is “yoked to his task and each is assigned a duty to perform.” [1. pp. 736,
425,765]. The persistent interest of God in the creative movement is also obvious from the fact that the
Gurus call Him Protector, Father, and a Just Administrator.
While discussing the concept of God of Attributes, Will and Grace, we have indicated its far-reaching
implications about the reality of the world and the spiritual primacy of moral life therein. These aspects of
God intimately connect Him with the world which is their only field of operation. Consequently, the Gurus’
message and mission also relate to this world, wherein alone their mission could be fulfilled. No prayer has
been expressed with greater depth and intensity than the one for the ‘gift of Naam’ Naam being the
Benevolent Supporter and Director of the world, the gift of Naam to the devotee simply means an
enlightened, loving and creative interest in the world and its development. How can one claim to be a
devotee of God or Naam and ask for its gift and, yet decline to toe the line of God, namely, of nurturing and
advancing the process of creativity and construction in the world ? It is for this reason that the Gurus have
strongly condemned all ascetic and escapist practices. “One reaches not Truth by remaining motionless like
trees and stones, nor by being sawn alive.” [1. p. 952].
In India, generally, the householdet’s duties were not believed to be conducive to higher spiritual
attainments. That is why one had to renounce worldly activities and take to the life of a hermit or Sanyasin.
As against it, all the Sikh Gurus, excepting the Eighth Guru, who passed away at an early age, were married
householders. Till the last days of their lives, they worked creatively and carried out their mission in the social
and political fields. Seen in the context of Indian tradition, the ideals and institutions of Sikhism are entirely
different. For the Gurus the world is a place of beauty. Man’s struggle therein provides an opportunity for
his progress. Hence the arena of man’s and the mystic’s work has to be in life and life alone. It is only the
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
challenges of life that enable man to show and test his moral and spiritual fiber. It is his deeds in the world
that alone form the basis of his spiritual assessment. The Guru, therefore, emphasizes that “one gets not to
God by despising the world.”
3. HAUMAIN
The doctrine of haumain is basic to Sikh theology. The present state of man’s consciousness, the
Gurus say, is egoistic, i.e. it is governed by haumain. The Gurus call such a person manmukh. In this normal
state of man, his self-will and animal propensities dominate. The ideal man, with the highest level of
consciousness or God consciousness, is called gurmukh. This egoistic consciousness or haumain is the cause of
all man’s problems and limitations. This doctrine of haumain holds the key to the understanding of Sikhism.
Haumain is the “T’ of the normal individual psyche. It is the director of all one’s organs, including
the nervous system and human reason. It is the self, the ego, or the centre of control of all working in every
being or individual. The Gurus say that “the world came into being by individuation.” [1. pp. 946, 466].
Evidently, for the growth of life, this creation of an individual self or hawmain in every being was essential.
There could be no animal life without there being in each organism a centre of consciousness. Haumain has,
thus, enabled the evolution of life. Every man is equipped with many kinds of organs and faculties. These
faculties, including his thoughts, are subservient to his individuality, self or ego. Throughout the evolution of
life, this ego-centre, or haumain has been the instrument and guardian of his security, welfare and progress.
Without a deep commitment to the interests, preservation and progress of the self, to the exclusion of every
other being or self, life could never survive the battle against challenges from the environment. This ego, or
haumain, has been the best means of securing the survival and the progress of life from amoeba to man.
But, what has been the very means of life’s survival and progress, has now become “the great malady
of man.” [1. p. 1258]. The struggle against the elements and other species having been largely won, man still
finds himself quite unequipped and helpless in dealing with the other members of his own species. The
Gurus emphasise that this baumain has become the greatest problem of man both for his social life and future
progress. Just as it is impossible for one’s stomach or liver to digest food for another person; in much the
same way, it is impossible for one’s thought system, intellect or reason to be anything but self-centred, the
same being basically subservient to the individual self or ego-consciousness. It is this organic condition of
man that the Gurus call baumain or ego. Man’s consciousness being self-centred, he is constitutionally
incapable of looking to the interests of others. This is the root-cause of the entire conflict between man and
man, between one society and the other, and between one nation and the other. Man is well equipped
intellectually and materially, yet poverty, misery, and war remain his major unsolved problems. The altruistic
tendencies developed in man as the result of cultural conditioning over the years are only superficial or
conditioned. Spontaneous altruism is constitutionally and psychologically impossible in the egocentric or
haumain governed man. The moment, the struggle for existence becomes keen, the basic self-centredness of
man comes into play. Thus start all the conflicts of man, social as well as national and international.
According to the Guru in this state of hawmain man has three limitations. He and his consciousness
are alienated or unconnected with the Basic or the Higher Consciousness that is the source of all energy,
virtues and goodness. “God created individuation but by forgetting Naam we come to grief.” Secondly, he is
unaware of his inalienable kinship with the other beings. Thirdly, ego-consciousness, by and large, works in a
determined or mechanistic way. It is not creative or free. The Basic Reality or God alone is Free and
Creative. God is the Causeless Cause or the Un-created Creator. We have already referred to two important
aspects of God. He is Creative or Free, He is the Ocean of Values and Virtues. Man’s egocenttism ot
haumain thus, constitutes his basic moral or spiritual problem. The fundamental question is, how to shed
one’s egoism and transcend one’s present limiting state or development.
4. SOLUTION
The Gurus are not pessimistic about the world or this egocentric condition of man. They emphasise
that man is not only capable of transcending this ego-consciousness, but is destined to do so. Their entire
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
message is meant to solve this problem. Theirs is a crusade to enable man to rise above this present level and
remove the hurdles that plague him and solve the problems that face him.
The Gurus indicate that there has been a continuing process of development, evolution and progtess
in the empirical world. They point out that progress from egoistic man to superman, or God-centred man is
not only possible, but is in accordance with the purpose of God. Individuation was created by God. There
has been gradual growth from small organisms to animals and finally to the animal-man with his subtle sense
of discrimination and introspection. “For several births (you) were a mere worm, for several births an insect,
for several births a fish or an animal.” [1. p. 176]. “After ages you have the glory of being a man.” “He
endowed you with the light of reason, discrimination and wisdom.” [1. p. 913]. “O man you are supreme in
God’s creation; now is your opportunity. You may or may not fulfill your destiny.” [1. p. 913].
Further progress of this egoistic man depends entirely on the deeds of the individual. Till man had
appeared on the scene, it was not possible for life to outgrow its animal character and alienation from God.
So far, like other animals, man, too, has been living an animal life. But, the Gurus emphasise the opportunity
available to man to grow into superman. They repeatedly address man to give up his egocentric activities and
thereby to rise to his full stature. “After ages, this invaluable opportunity of human birth is available, but one
loses it for nothing.” [1. p. 1203]. “You have obtained the privilege of human birth, now is your only
opportunity to meet God.” [1. p. 12].
The remedy according to the Gurus is that man should develop a higher consciousness by linking his
consciousness with God, Naam, or the Basic Consciousness. It is this solution which is the basis of their
religious system and institutions. The Guru says, “Naam and haumain are opposed to each other. The two
cannot co-exist.” [1. p. 560]. “Haumain is a great malady. The remedy is to attune oneself to Naam by God’s
Grace.” [1. p. 466]. It means that self-centredness should be substituted by God-centredness. “The man
who is self-centred is far from God.” [1. p. 235].
Let us explain the implications of these important hymns. In most other religions, worldly life is
opposed to spiritual life. But, not so in Sikhism. Here it is egocentric life that is opposed to spiritual life and
not worldly life as such. The Gurus consider the world to be real and accept full responsibilities in that
regard. In fact, as God-centredness implies activity in the worldly life, the same is considered essential for the
seeker and the God-conscious person. For, link with Naam means to be the agent of Dynamic Naam or God,
the Ocean of Virtues. In fact, life and its activities alone reveal the distinction between a self-centred man
and a God-centred one. Hence, “He who destroys evil becomes a perfect man.” [1. p. 404]. “Love,
contentment, truth, humility and other virtues enable the seed of Naam to sprout.” [1. p. 955]. “Our deeds
alone bear witness unto our life.” [1. p. 1383].
These hymns indicate that the way to higher achievement lies in being altruistic or moral instead of
being self-centred. Except for some conditioned or calculated moral activity, a self-centred person cannot be
spontaneously altruistic. The solution really consists in transferring the control of the mind and body from
narrow ego-consciousness to Naam God or God-consciousness. And being linked to Naam involves neither
inactivity nor withdrawal from life. Perforce it must lead to spontaneous altruistic deeds because this
consciousness is awate of its kinship both with every other being and with the Basic Reality, the Ocean of
Virtues. Therefore, this consciousness accepts total responsibility and is as active as the Creative Reality. Just
as haumain and Naam ate opposed to each other, in the same manner God-centredness and inactivity are a
contradiction in terms.
We shall explain why there is so much emphasis on moral life in Sikhism. A self-centred person has
virtually a determined psyche. He is neither free, nor creative. The progress from self-centredness to God-
consciousness, is progress from a virtually determined or a mechanistic state to a free and creative state. A
moral act involves voluntary decision on the part of one’s consciousness. We never call a material thing to be
moral or immoral, since it is governed by the laws of physics and its movement is determined. But, a moral
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
act on the part of a person is the result of his free will or decision or choice. It is, thus, a clear step on the
path from being determined to being free; it is an effort to rise from the state of haumain to the state of God-
consciousness or creative freedom. It is, indeed, a spiritual act. Hence the fundamental importance of moral
life in Sikhism, since it is the only spiritual means leading towards God-consciousness. “One cannot be a
Yogi by mere wishing. Real Yoga lies in treating all beings alike.” [1. p. 730]. “Let all be called high, to me
none appears low; One Potter has fashioned all vessels and One Light pervades the whole universe.” [1. p.
866]. Real spiritual life involves the acceptance and practice of the idea of the Fatherhood of God and the
brotherhood of man in one’s actual living. The Gurus stress that God pervades all hearts and one can attune
oneself to Him and develop a new state of higher consciousness. While we are in the normal ego-state, we
are unconscious of this Immanence of God in us. “Where there is egoism, God is not; where there is God,
there cannot be any egoism.” [1. p. 1092]. “God unites the seeker with Himself.” “God pervades the heart
and one gives up ego and evil.” [1. pp. 32, 30, 35, 49]. “By His Grace God comes in body and mind.” It
means that the entire psyche of such a person is guided by God-consciousness. “By Naam is the mind
illumined.” [1. p. 82]. Naam is dynamic and attributive.
These hymns emphasise that the way to solve our problems and difficulties is to establish a relation
with God. This presence of God in us has variously been described as Naam, Guru, Word, Light and Will.
It is virtuous deeds alone that lead one away from the life of hawmain and towards the path of Naam
ot God-centredness. But, ultimately it is only God’s Grace that unites one with Naam. By this union a new
and higher centre of consciousness is gained, called God-consciousness. With God’s Grace is the ultimate
insignia of approval conferred on man.” [1. p. 7]. It is a state when the human consciousness becomes free
and spontaneously moral and altruistic.
Guru Nanak puts the question as to, “How can the wall of falsehood intervening between us and
Reality be removed”, and gives a categoric reply. “It can be removed by carrying out God’s Will.” [1. p. 1].
And God’s Will is Attributive, Creative and Gracious. This explains the pre-eminent importance of moral life
in Sikhism.
5. GOAL
The next issue is as to what is the goal in Sikhism. In this field the Gurus have made a completely
radical departure from the general religious tradition, more especially from the Indian tradition. Many
misunderstandings about the ideology, growth and history of Sikhism arise because of the fallacious
assumption that the goal in Sikhism is the same as in the other Indian religions.
The Gurus have explained their views about the spiritual goal of man by enunciating five principles.
All of them point to the same conclusion about the ideal life.
(a) Righteous Deeds Alone The Basis Of Man’s Spiritual Assessment: In the first hymn of Cosmogtaphy,
Guru Nanak states what should be the role of man on earth, which has been declared to be a place for the
practice of righteousness. The assessment of man, Guru Nanak says, will be made on the basis and character
of his deeds. This idea has been repeated in numerous hymns like. “With God only the deeds one does in
this world, count.” [1. p. 1383]. “Through virtue is one enlightened.”
(b) Higher Than Truth Is Truthful Living: Guru Nanak states, “Everything is lower than Truth, but
higher still is truthful living.” [1. p. 62]. It is just a symbolic way of emphasizing that the ideal is to live the
active life of truth and not only to know Truth as an end in itself. The goal is to live an active and creative
life. “True living is living God in life.” [1. p. 684].
(c) Carry Out The Will Of God: Guru Nanak specifically raises the question as to how one can be a
true human being, or an ideal man. Then he himself provides the answer: “By carrying out the Will
of God.” The Gurus conceive of God as a God of Will, Dynamic, Attributive and Creative. God is always
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
nurturing the world with a benevolent eye. For man, the ideal life is to carry out His Will. The goal is not
only to establish union with God, not only to know his Will, but after having done that, to carry it out. The
ideal is not blissful union as an end in itself, but union in order to be God’s instrument or agent in the world.
Therefore, in Sikhism it involves a life of continuous moral activity.
(d) God-Conscious Man: On the question of haumain, we came to the conclusion that the Gurus lay
down God-consciousness as the ideal. Because of his new consciousness he is spontaneously virtuous. All
exhortations to man are to achieve his ideal by the practice of virtues. “Make the body the soil; put therein
the seed of good deeds; with Naam Divine irrigate it. Let thy mind be cultivator, and raise crop of God's
devotion.” [1. p. 23].
(e) Link With Naam : Naam is Creative and Attributive. Naam is working in the world with
Benevolence and Love. A very large number of hymns in Guru Granth Sahib request for the individual to be
linked to Naam. “He reaches the highest stage whom God graciously galvanizes to His Naam.” [1. p. 284].
“Pray, link me to God.”
Accordingly, the ideal of Sikh Bhakti is to be yoked, attuned or linked to Naam. Naam being the
opposite of egoism, and the Ocean of Virtues and Values, to be linked to Naam simply means to become His
instrument and share the responsibility of a creative and virtuous development in the world.
The Gurus have laid down these five principles prescribing the goal in Sikhism. Whether it is the
ideal of God-consciousness, or of carrying out the Will of God, or of the gift of Naam, in essence all of them
prescribe the same goal or spiritual truth. Again, whether it is the ideal of righteous deeds or of truthful
living, the discipline and direction are exactly the same. We, therefore, come to the conclusion that in
Sikhism, the goal is to develop a higher consciousness and lead a life of creative and moral activity. It means
that spiritual life and moral life are virtually synonymous and coextensive. One inevitably leads to the other.
It is in this context that the Gurus describe themselves as the “servants” of God and His “soldiers.”
The Gurus pray that their lives may be devoted to the service of God. “May I have millions of hands to serve
Thee.” [1. p. 781]. “The service is the way to cross the hurdles of life.” “Be ever alert in the service of God.
Serve God every moment and relax not.” [1. p. 77]. As the world is the authentic creation of God, supported
by His Immanence, the service of God means the service of His creation. “Service in the world leads to
approval in the Court of God.” [1. p. 26]. This is the goal of Sikhism.
6. GURMUKH OR THE IDEAL MAN
The Gurus describe the qualities of the gurmukbh and the role he is expected to play in life. These
draw a clear picture of the ideal life in Sikhism. The lives of the Gurus are another indication of the kind of
life, the seeker and the gunmmukh are supposed to lead. Bhai Gurdas calls Guru Nanak a gurmukh. A gurmukh,
being the instrument of God, exhibits in his life all the qualities attributed to God. Because on the one hand
he is in touch with God who is All Love, and on the other hand he is conscious of his close kinship with
every other living being.
(i) He Is Godly, And Has All Virtues: “He (gurmukh) is the ocean of virtues, pure and truthful.” [1. pp.
905,1000,1175]. “He deals in the virtues of God.” “He is shelter for the shelterless.” “God is
Compassionate, Merciful and Support of the earth; and so is the nature of saints.” [1. p. 1017]. “The gurmukh
saves all and removes pain.” [1. p. 232]. “He becomes like Him with whom imbued.” [1. pp. 411, 1021]. “He
practices good spontaneously; he is the fountain spring of benevolence.” [1. p. 273]. Being God-conscious,
he is not alienated from his relationship with other beings.
(it) He Carries Out His Will: God has a Will. The ideal man carries out that attributive Will. His
mind is filled with Naam; true mind is imbued with Word, he serves truth, practices truth and earns truth.
“Imbued by His Will, he carries it out.” [1. p. 1423]. “The soldiers of God act just as He Wills.” “Wonderful
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
is His Will; one knows it only if one walks in His Will. Then alone one knows how to lead the life of truth.”
[1. p. 940]. The Guru emphasizes, that he who carries out His Will alone knows it; and he who knows it must
carry it out. A Will known is essentially a Will carried out. “They who know His Will carry it out.” [1. p.
OO:
(iil) He Is The Servant Of God And Man : ‘They “dedicate life to Him”; he is “a combatant in the cause
of God”; [1. pp. 74, 281] he is “the servant of God.” The Guru calls himself as “the slave of all creation.” [1.
pp. 254, 377, 844]. The Guru prays: “The world is sick, O save it by any means you please.” [1. p. 853].
This hymn is of classic significance. The Guru prays for the entire humanity. He does not want God to help
men only through him. He makes no claim to exclusive prophethood. He wants everyone to be saved by any
means God may be pleased to use. Nothing could be more expressive of the anonymity and humility of the
Guru and his deep concern for the entire humanity.
(iv) He Partakes Actively In All Fields Of Life: Unlike the Jivan Mukfa in other systems, where the goal
is union ot merger as an end in itself, the gurmukh’s aim is not salvation for himself alone. He works for all,
nor does he compromise with evil. For, “God’s chosen is one who fights for the oppressed.” [1. p. 1105].
His responsibility is total. As the instrument of God, he works for others and in all fields of life. Just as is
the area of his responsibility, the gurmukh’s sphere of activity too is unlimited.
(v) He Aims To Make All Others God-Centred : “He unites himself with God and unites others too with
Him.” “The servants of God salvage all.” [1. pp. 8, 3, 944, 295]. “His self is emancipated and he emancipates
others.” The emphasis on this ideal of making everyone God-centred is so great that the Guru says that
“God established the earth for the sake of God-centred persons.” [1. pp. 965, 941]. This, in essence, means
that the creation or evolution of the superman on earth is the purpose of God towards which all life is
moving, and the gunmukh works for it.
7. METHODOLOGY
The Gurus have prescribed three modes of discipline. (a) company of God-centred persons, (b)
moral life or service of man, and (c) remembering God and prayer. It is a code of conduct the seeker has to
practise throughout the entire course of one’s life.
(a) Company Of God-Centred Persons : The society of the ideal man is of great value to the seeker, both
as a model and as a guide. His influence is the best for shaping man’s growing personality and giving him
strength and direction in times of doubt and difficulty. “Just as the arind (castor plant) imbibes the fragrance
of the chandan tree, the fallen are emancipated by the saints.” “In good company one becomes good.” “God
sends saints to reveal God’s concern for man.” [1. p. 929].
(b) Moral Life And Service: Guru Nanak says that the earth is a place for the practice of righteousness.
In Sikhism, moral activity is a step towards freedom and creativity. Hence, the highest importance of moral
activity in the spiritual training and system of the Gurus. Spiritual discipline aims at enabling man to face life
in a righteous and creative way. As such, a householder’s life is an essential moral responsibility of man. The
seeker’s training has to take place during the course of a moral life and not in a monastery. It is important to
understand that the Gurus never created any monastic system or a place for the training of a few. The psyche
can be properly conditioned only when it is subject to the stresses and strains of the social environment of
man. One can learn to swim only inside the pool and not outside it. This is exactly the reason why the
Gurus excluded ascetics from the Sikh fold [4. p. 86] and condemned all ritualistic, yogic and other-worldly
practices and austerities. In Sikhism, moral activity is the basis of all spiritual growth, and this activity can be
done only in the social field. For, such activity alone is the way to eliminate egoism, and test the seeker’s
progress. Keeping in view the character and role of the gurmukh it is obvious that progress is possible only
through moral life. “Singing and dancing in ecstasy are no worship; love and the giving up of ego are the
ways of real worship.” [1. pp. 159, 465] “Drive out selfishness and one is fulfilled.” “Where the weak are
cared for, there is showered God’s mercy.” [1. p. 750]. “Evil separates, good deeds unite.” “Service in the
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
world is the way to be fulfilled.” There is, indeed, no spiritual progress without active moral functioning.
The service of God is a synonym for the service of man. Moral activities have the highest priority in Sikhism,
these being the best means of training.
The use of human rationality and a sense of discrimination (babek budbi) have a distinct place in moral
life. Sikh theology being non-deterministic, man has a distinct moral freedom and responsibility in the choice
of his actions. It is this exercise of right choice that determines his spiritual progress. “By use of
discrimination or intellect one serves God.” [1. p. 1245]. God’s concern for the moral development of man
can be gauged from the fact that it is “His innermost nature to help the erring.” “With self-control and
discipline, we forsake vice and see the miracle of man becoming God.” [1. pp. 343, 347].
For the moral life of man two virtues, namely, humility and love, find the highest priority in the
Gutru’s ethical system and the discipline prescribed for the seeker.
(c) Remembering God And Prayer: In Guru Granth Sahib, there is considerable emphasis on
remembering God. But, the remembering of God is by itself not enough to link oneself with Him. This
contemplation does not mean yogic practices for the achievement of the so-called bliss as an end in itself.
We are unaware of any hymn in Guru Granth Sahib recommending yogic practices or any tradition in this
regard. Nor are we aware of any hymn in Guru Granth Sahib which, apart from recommending prayer and
keeping the fear of God always in one’s mind, directs the practice of day-long meditations in seclusion, and
away from the day’s work. There are clear hymns against the use of such a course as a means of spiritual
advancement. “Every one repeats God’s name, but such repetition is not the way to God.” “With guile in
heart, he practices guile but mutters God’s name. He is pounding husk and is in darkness and pain.” [1. p.
656]. The Gurus deny the utility of any mechanical means of worship or mere repetition of words or hymns.
But remembering can be a way to keep in mind one’s basic ideals. Evidently, remembrance of God is a kind
of preparation for the virtuous activities to be undertaken in the social life. It is actually the character of the
subsequent deeds that will be the test of man. This remembering is like keeping the fear of God in mind and
moving in life strictly on the moral path. It does not mean mechanical repetition every day or morning. That
is why the Guru says that “it is only one out of crores who remembers God.” [1. p. 1428].
Prayer as in any other theistic system, finds a place of eminence in Guru Granth Sahib. Prayer,
expresses the humility and insignificance of the devotee. It is a mode of seeking God’s Grace. It is a humble
attempt to draw upon God’s strength so as to restore one’s sagging energies and will in the moral struggle of
man. “My energies are exhausted and I am helpless. But O God, with Thy Grace nothing is difficult for me
to accomplish.” [1. p. 1429]. Such a prayer is not a repetitive formula or practice, nor is it an end in itself. It
is really a preparation for the moral activity to be undertaken in the world. In fact, it is inalienably linked with
the subsequent activity. Without its external operation, the internal activity remains invalid. The very fact
that the Gurus started no monastic system shows that they never advocated either prayer or any other
meditational system as an independent mode of spiritual training. “One is emancipated while laughing and
playing in life and living a full life.” [1. p. 522]. “The God-centred lives truth while yet a householder.”
[1. p. 661].
8. SIKH BHAKTI AND SOCIETY
We have already come to the conclusion that in Sikhism moral activity is the chief method of
spiritual growth. This raises two issues. The first concerns the approach of the gurmukh towards social
institutions and making changes in them. The Gurus, and more especially Guru Nanak, have been sharply
critical of the evil socio-political institutions and customs of the times. About prejudices regarding caste and
against women (which had received almost religious sanction), the Gurus say, “The Vedas make a wrong
distinction of caste, color, heaven and hell.” [1. p. 1243]. “No one should take pride in caste; foolish man be
not proud of caste; this pride leads to innumerable evils. They make distinction of four castes, but all are
born of God.” “The whole world is made of the same elements. Then why make distinctions ?” [1. pp.
1128]. “They talk of pollution and warn others not to touch their food, lest it should be defiled. But their
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
own bodies are impure.” [1. p. 472]. “Why call woman impure when without women there would be none.”
[1. p. 473]. Evil social practices and customs have been denounced. God-consciousness consists in treating
all as equals. The idleness of yogis and ascetics, hypocrisy of priests and Brahmins, and inequalities in the
economic field and the amassing of wealth have been condemned. “God’s riches are for all but men try to
grab them for themselves.” “God’s bounty belongs to all, but in the world it is maldistributed.” [1. p. 1171].
“Man gathers riches by making others miserable.” [1. p. 889]. “Riches cannot be gathered without sin and
these do not keep company after death.” [1. p. 417]. “ O yogi, are you not ashamed of begging from door to
door for your food?” [1. p. 886]. “The man incapable of earning a living, gets his ears split (to become a
yogi) or becomes a mendicant. He calls himself a guru or saint but begs for food from door to door. Never
look up to such a person or touch his feet. He knows the right way who earns his living by hard work and
shares his earnings with others.” [1. p. 1245]. Similarly, in the political field, the oppression of the rulers, the
tyranny of the invaders, and the corruption of the officials have been deprecated.
Two important things should be understood in regard to this criticism. This criticism is the direct
consequence of the Guru’s ideas about God and the reality of the world. Their world-view is clearly of life-
affirmation. The brotherhood of man is the basis of their socio-spiritual approach. Hence their three-
pronged attack on all kinds of socio-political evils and inequalities, on downgrading the socio-religious status
of women, and on idleness, renunciation and withdrawal from the world. Secondly, this condemnation was
not a mere verbal exercise, it was an essential step to educate the people, change their ideas and build up fresh
motivations. For, an important function of religion is to create and “establish powerful, pervasive and long
lasting moods and motivations in men.” [5. p. 75]. Further change in social institutions could never have
been brought about unless this calculated change in the moods and the minds of people had been brought
about before that.
The second issue concerns the remolding of social institutions and organizations, and the means to
be adopted for the desired purposes. The Gurus describe God not only as the Helper of the weak, the
shelterless and the supportless, but also the Destroyer of the oppressor. The Sixth Guru clearly stated that
his sword was both for the help of the oppressed and the destruction of the tyrants. It evidently implies that
the Gurus contemplate reconstruction and creation of alternative moral institutions. Naturally, alternative
human institutions can come up only by the substitution, remolding or destruction of the old and unwanted
organizations. The lives of the Gurus ate a clear pointer that, in their system, change of environment to
improve the moral climate in all fields is clearly envisaged and sanctioned. In any system where moral life has
an independent validity and an importance of its own as a desirable end, the making of environmental and
organizational changes for that purpose would /pso facto be justified. The Gurus accordingly envisage a change
in environment and the remolding of social organizations.
An allied important issue is the means to be adopted for bringing about the desired institutional and
other changes. In God’s world all form and progress are the product of force; since no change is possible
without the use of force. Again, as all encroachment on the rights of others involves aggression, the same
cannot be undone except by the use of an equal and opposite use of force. In fact, all action and activity,
howsoever good, involve the use of force, because action and force are synonymous. Action not involving
the use of force is a contradiction in terms. Therefore, except by some miracle, it is impossible to bring about
a change in the social or institutional environment without the use of requisite force. It is significant to note
that in the entire Guru Granth Sahib there is no miracle attributed to a Guru. In the Guru’s system, only the
miracle of deeds are performed. Logically, it is impossible to construct anything without destroying or
remolding the existing structure. Of course, the force used should not seek to serve any selfish or egoistic
purpose.
In the background of the Indian tradition this issue about the use of force as the means for a moral
end needs some clarification, since a lot of confusion among some scholars has arisen on this score. The
alternative to the use of force or killing and meat-eating is the doctrine of ahimsa. Ahimsa has been advocated
by most Indian religions, as was also done by Bhagat Kabir. But, it is of significant importance that it is Guru
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Nanak who opposed this doctrine. “Men discriminate not and quarrel over meat-eating. They know not
what is flesh and what is non-flesh, and in what lies or does not lie a sin.” [1. p. 1289]. In his
hymns, the Guru details his views concerning the issue of means and the cant about meat-eating. He chides
the Brahmins for their pretence about meat-eating. He describes how the ways and processes of life involve
the transformation and the use of the flesh. He also explains that life is present in every grain of food and
even in the fite-wood and the cow-dung which the Brahmins use for the purpose of purification. The Guru
exposes the fallacy that life, much less a moral deed, is possible without the use of force. He means that
immorality does not lie in the use of force, which is inevitable for all living, whether moral or immoral, but it
lies in the direction or the purpose for which force is used. The significance and thrust of these hymns have
often been missed. Evidently, from the very start Guru Nanak contemplated a change in the socio-moral
atmosphere and institutions. The doctrine of abimsa was a serious hurdle in disturbing or demolishing the
status quo. Therefore, as a prophet of a new religion, he once and for all made it plain that, so long as one
wotked in the midst of social life, all arbitrary prejudices against meat-eating or the use of force as such were
wrong and meaningless. It is very significant to note that the religious systems that insisted on abimsa were
either ascetic or monastic, or suggested withdrawal from the world. The Radical Bhagats were neither
monastic nor ascetic, but they never considered social involvement to be a duty or a field of spiritual training
and growth. Kabir deems the world to be a trap from which deliverance has to be sought. His attitude
towatds woman is exactly like that of monastic or ascetic religions. While referring to the Bhakti cults of
India, Ray says that these had completely surrendered to the status quo and the socio-political establishment of
the day. All we wish to emphasise is that no religious system that suggests the love of man as an essential part
of the love of God can accept or suggest the limitation of abimsa for work in the moral or the social field.
Albimsa is inevitably linked with religious systems that have a world-view of life-negation and are unconcerned
with socio-political changes. It is, in fact, an ascetic tool, being the product or a part of an ascetic or monastic
methodology.
It may be argued that great pacifists like Mahatma Gandhi successfully employed non-violence as the
means of bringing about socio-political changes. But, it is now well-known that when the Mahatma had to
face the major challenge of his life, he found himself helpless. The Mahatma being the greatest exponent of
non-violence in modern times, when the Second World War broke out, the pacifists of the world looked up
to him for a lead. But the Mahatma could furnish or suggest no non-violent or effective remedy. Ahimsa
could be of little help to him in stopping the holocaust. The situation became so frustrating for the Mahatma
that he even thought of committing suicide so that if he could do nothing to stop the destruction, he would at
least not live to see the misery caused by it. [2. p. 34]. The two occasions when he had to discard ahimsa as a
tool are quite well-known, namely, when he agreed to the Congress accepting the responsibility of the war
effort, and, again, when in 1947, he had no objection to the entry of Indian forces in Kashmir for its defence.
Another great pacifist, too, had to take a contrasted stand when faced with a crucial issue. During the First
World War Bertrand Russell opposed the idea of war and violence to the point of being arrested in pursuance
of his pacifist beliefs. But, later, after the Second World War, Russell himself suggested an attack against
Soviet Russia before it became a major atomic power and a threat or menace to the entire world. [3. pp. 53-
57].
The issue needs some further clarifications. Reasons and force ate two tools available to man for
work and progtess in the socio-political sphere. Without the use of both these means, it is impossible to
bring about any social change. In fact a high sense of reason or discrimination is the chief faculty that
distinguishes man from other animals. We have seen that the Gurus clearly indicate reason to be a good
instrument of religious progress. “By the use of discrimination of intellect one serves God. By
discrimination one is honored. By intellect and study one understands things.” “It is the sense of
discrimination that makes one charitable. This is the right way, rest is all wrong.” [1. p. 1245]. “Man is
blessed with the light of reason and discrimination.” “One in fear of God and discriminating between good
and bad, appears sweet to God.” [1. p. 763]. Yet in the history of civilization human reason or intellect has
also been used as the greatest instrument of oppression and destruction. Human rationality has been called a
convenient and clever cloak to cover man’s bestiality. Does it imply that we should altogether discard reason
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
as a useful tool for religious progress. We have already noted what is the answer given by the Gurus on this
point. The fact is that both reason and force are neutral tools that can be used both for good and evil, for
construction and destruction. The Gurus unambiguously accept the use of both of them as the means of
religious functioning and progress. In doing so they made major departure from the earlier Bhakti and
religious traditions. This break with the past was the direct result of their new religious methodology and
goals and consequent social involvement and objectives.
All consciousness or life is nothing but a centre of perfection, deliberation, activity and organisation.
The Gurus accepted life, the world and its responsibilities in toto. “Despise not the world for it is the
creation of God,” says the Guru. As the instruments or the servants of God, they had to carry out God’s
Will in helping the weak and destroying the oppressor. Their spiritual system, therefore, involved the use of
all the available tools, including reason and force, for the purposeful progress of man and his organizing
consciousness. According to the Guru, the malady is not the use of reason and force, which can both be
used and abused, but the egoistic consciousness of man, which is narrow and inadequate in its perception and
partial in its outlook and functioning, because it stands alienated from the Basic Reality. Therefore, the way
out is the development of a higher consciousness in order to become a whole man or superman with a sense
of kinship and total responsibility towards all beings. The higher the consciousness, the truer its perception
and the greater its capacity for organisation and functioning in order to execute God’s mission. Man’s
greatest problems today are poverty, disease and wars. Undoubtedly, these need the greatest organizational
effort in the socio-political field. The diagnosis of the Gurus is that the egoistic man has neither the
perception nor the vision nor even the organizational, moral and spiritual capacity to solve the problems of
man. It is only the religious man with a higher consciousness, who alone can fulfill God’s mission of creating
the Kingdom of God on earth. The Guru indicates the path of progress or evolution : “God created first
Himself then haumain, third maya and fourth the state of poise and bliss.” [1. p. 113]. And in the second and
third stages man’s development is only partial. The aim is the achievement of the fourth stage. In Sikhism,
the development of union with God is not an end in itself. The goal is the development of a higher
consciousness, so as to discharge the total responsibility devolving on man in order to create a world of
harmony and happiness.
The Gurus say that human problems cannot be solved at the third stage of man’s development.
These can be dealt with adequately only at the fourth stage. And, this development of a higher consciousness
is for a religious purpose. That purpose or mission is epitomized in the lives of the Gurus. Guru Hargobind
in his talk with Saint Ramdas made it clear that what Guru Nanak had given up was mammon and not the
world, the enrichment of which, in accordance with the attributive Will of God, was the mission of the
Gurus, as also of every God-conscious man. In such a righteous world alone the problems of poverty,
misery, disease, war and conflict can be solved. The development of superman is, therefore, the spiritual
putpose for which life has been striving.
REFERENCES
Guru Granth Sahib.
Maulana Abdul Kalam Azad: India Wins Freedom.
Russell, Bertrand : Unpopular Essays.
Hari Ram Gupta: Hestory Of The Sikh Gurus.
Juergensmeyer, M., (Ed.) : S7kb Studies.
Ove Goon
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
4
NAAM IN SIKHISM
DALJEET SINGH
1. INTRODUCTORY
Every religion has its world-view on which are based its concepts about Reality, the place of man in
the universe, ethics and human goals. All students of Sikhism know that the concept of Naam is fundamental
to the gospel of Guru Granth Sahib and the entire structure of its theology. In fact, Sikhism has often been
called the Naam Maarg ot the way of Naam. It is in this context that we shall endeavour to trace the salient
features and implications of this concept, which we believe, holds the key to the understanding of the
message of the Sikh Gurus, their religious and social ideas and their world-view.
At the outset, we should like to make one point clear about the language and the various traditional
terms used by the Sikh Gurus. Since they were conveying their message to the mass of the people, both
Hindus and Muslims, with a view to evoking a response in the very depths of their hearts, they have, for
obvious reasons, used in their hymns the then current words and symbols from Indian, Persian and Arabic
languages. And yet, one thing is patent even from a cursory study of the Guru Granth Sahib that the Gurus
have, as was essential for the proper understanding of a new gospel, made the meaning of each concept,
symbol and term employed by them, unambiguously clear. Many a time the meaning of such words is entirely
their own. Accordingly, we have refrained from tracing the meaning of Naam to its traditional usage and
background. In fact, such an exercise could be even misleading and wasteful. We shall, therefore, base our
arguments and inferences about Naam on the hymns in Guru Granth Sahib and the accepted facts about the
lives of the Sikh Gurus.
2. DEFINITION
Let us now try broadly to indicate how Naam has been used in Guru Granth Sahib, where it appears
in a majority of hymns. The Sikh Gurus have given the word Naam, a distinct and significant meaning which
is far different from that of mere ‘Name’ or ‘psychic factors’ as understood in Naam-Roopa in traditional
literature. [5. p. 169]. The basic definition of Naam as contained in Swkhmani and other hymns in Guru
Granth Sahib is given below :
() ‘Naam sustains all regions and universes, all thought, knowledge and consciousness, all skies and
stars, all forces and substances, all continents and spheres. Naam emancipates those who accept it in their
heart. He, on whom is His Grace, is yoked to Naam, and he reaches the highest state of development.’ [1. p.
284].
(it) ‘Naam is the Creator of everything. To be divorced from Naam is death.’ [1. p. 603]. ‘All is
created by Naam.’ |1. p. 753]. ‘Naam gives form to everything and through Naam comes all Wisdom or Light.’
[1. p. 946].
(it) “Naam extends to all creation. There is no place or space where Naam is not.’ [1. p. 4].
(iv) ‘Naam is the ‘Nine Treasures’ and Nectar (amrita). It permeates the body.’[1. p. 293].
(v) ‘Naam, the immaculate, is unfathomable. How can it be known? Naam is within us. How to get
to it? It is Naam that works everywhere and permeates all space. The perfect Guru awakens your heart to
the vision of Naam. It is by the Grace of God that one meets such an Enlightener.’ [1. p. 1242].
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
From the above verses it is clear that the Gurus do not use the word Naam in any restrictive sense, of
its being a psychic factor or mere consciousness, but refer to it as the Highest Power, creating, informing,
supporting and working the entire creation. In short, Naam is the Reality, supporting and directing the
created worlds or the entire cosmos. There are numerous verses in Guru Granth Sahib where Naam and God
have been described synonymously. Both Naam and God have been mentioned as “the Creator of the
Cosmos”, “the Sustainer of the Universe”, “Permeating and informing all things, beings, space and
interspace”, “the Treasure of virtues, values”, “the Support of the helpless”, “the Giver of peace and bliss”,
“Eternal”, “Perfect”, “Unfathomable’, “Friend”, “Master” and “Emancipator.” The highest state of man is
mentioned as the one when he lives and works in tune with God or Naam, often called God’s Naam. We,
therefore, find that God and Naam are real, eternal and unfathomable. The Sikh Gurus have repeatedly
emphasized, as is also stated in the very opening verse of Guru Granth Sahib, that God is one, EA Oamkaar,
and no second entity, as in the case of the Sankhya system, is at all postulated. The Guru says, “My Lord is
the only One. He is the only One, (understand) brother, He is the only One.” [1. p. 350]. This
unambiguously leads us to conclude that God and Naam are one and the same, and the latter may be called
the immanent or qualitative aspect of God, since God has been described both as unmanifest (#rguna) and
the Creator, and Ocean of values.
In view of the above, we should define Naam as the Dynamic Immanence of God or the Reality
sustaining and working the manifest world of force and form. It is on the basis of these fundamentals that
we should like to trace and understand some important concepts and conclusions, ideas and institutions,
trends and traditions in Sikhism and its socio-religious way of life.
3. NAAM AND COSMOLOGY
The Guru writes, “the self-existent God manifested Himself into Naam. Second came the Creation
of the universe. He permeates it and revels in His creation.” “God created the world of life, He planted
Naam in it and made it the place for righteous activity.” [1. p. 463].
Thus, according to the concept of Naam and the hymns quoted earlier in this regard, God created the
world and in His immanent aspect, as Naam, is informing and working it. Only one entity, namely, God, is
envisaged and the world, in time and space, is His creation, the same being supported and directed by Naam.
Let us see if this cosmological view is also supported by other verses in Guru Granth Sahib.
In the very opening verse of Guru Granth Sahib, God is described as the Sole-One, His Naam as
Real, Creator-Lord, ...... Timeless Person, One that is not born, Self-existent. [1. p. 1]. The Gurus have stated
at a number of places that there was a stage when the Transcendent God was by Himself; and it is later that
He started His Creative Activity. In S%db Gosh/, in answer to a question as to where was the Transcendent
God before the stage of creation, Guru Nanak replied, “To think of the Transcendent Lord in that state is to
enter the realm of wonder. Even at that stage of swnn (void), He permeated all that void.” [1. p. 940]. The
Guru, in effect, means that to matters that are beyond the spacio-temporal world, it would be wrong to apply
the spacio-temporal logic, and yet man knows of no other logic or language. Perforce, He has to be
explained, howsoever inadequately or symbolically, only in terms of that language. That is why the Guru has
cautioned us against the pitfalls and inadequacy of human logic and language to comprehend the Timeless
One. All the same, the Guru has mentioned the state when the Transcendent God was all by Himself and
there was no creation. The Gurus say, “When there was no form in sight, how could there be good or bad
actions? When God was in the Self-Absorbed state, there could be no enmity or conflict. When God was all
by Himself, there could be no attachment or misunderstanding. Himself He starts the creation. He is the
Sole-Creator, there is no second One.” [1. p. 290]. “For millions of aeons, the Timeless One was by Himself.
There was no substance or space, no day or night (1.e., no time,) no stars or galaxies; God was in His Trance.”
[1. p. 1035]. “God was by Himself and there was nothing else ...... There was no love or devotion, nor was
His Creative Power in operation ...... When He willed, He created the Universe.” [1. p. 1036]. The same idea
is expressed in these words, “When He willed, the creation appeared.” [1. p. 18]. Again, in answer to the
question of the Yogis, “When there was no sign and no form, where was the Word (Logos) and how was He
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
identified with Truth?” [1. p. 945]. The Guru replied, “When there was no form, no sign, no individuation,
the Word in its essence abided in the Transcendent God; when there was no earth, no sky, (time or space),
the Lord permeated everything. All distinctions, all forms then abided in the Wondrous Word. No one is
pure without Truth. Ineffable is this gospel.” [1. pp. 945-6].
In short, the Gurus say that before He created form, He was Formless; before He was Immanent, He
was Transcendent only : and yet, all immanence, expression, creativity were inherent in Him, and so was His
Word, in essence.
In the Jap(u), where a picture of the realm of creativity is given, the Guru writes, “In the region of
Truth is God, where He perpetually creates and watches the universe with His benevolent eye, deliberating
and directing according to as He Wills.” Further, it is stated, “In the region of Creativity (Karam), only God’s
Power or Force is at work.” [1. p. 8]. Again, “Of the region of construction or effort, the medium of
expression is form. Here most fantastic forms are fashioned, including consciousness, perception, mind and
intellect.” Further still, “Innumerable creations are fashioned, myriads are the forms, myriads are the moons,
suns, regions.” [1. pp. 7-8]. These hymns also indicate how the process of creativity or a becoming world
started, and is being sustained and directed by Benevolent God.
In all the above quotations from Guru Granth Sahib, the same idea is expressed, namely, that God is
the Sole Entity, Who in His Creative Urge, has produced the Cosmos, which He, in His immanent aspect,
Naam, is sustaining vigilantly and directing benevolently according to His Will. In the created world no other
entity, like Prakrif#i in Sankhya and other dualistic systems, is assumed. While the world is real and is directed
by Immanent God, at no stage is the separate independent existence of matter accepted directly or by
implication.
4. METAPHYSICAL IMPLICATION OF NAAM
We have seen that according to the concept of Naam and the hymns already quoted in this regard,
God created Himself and Naam, and at the second place was created the universe. Further, this universe is
being sustained and directed by God as Naam or His Immanent Aspect. This concept of God being the Sole
Entity and being the Creator God (arta purakh) is so fundamental in the Sikh theology, that it is mentioned
in the very opening line (Moo/ Mantra) of Guru Granth Sahib and in the beginning of almost every section and
sub-section of it. Both the doctrine of Naam and Mool/ Manira clearly point out the theology of Sikhism being
monotheistic. Let us, therefore, try to see whether this conclusion of ours is correct and whether many of
those hurriedly-begotten views about Sikhism being pantheistic, Vedantic, Sankhyic, Yogic or Buddhistic have
any validity. A few of the reasons supporting our conclusion are as under :
(i) Throughout the hymns of Guru Granth Sahib, nothing is more significant than the acceptance of
the Creator-creature relation between God and man. Invariably, God has been addressed as ‘Thou’, ‘Mother’,
‘Father’, ‘Brother’, ‘Beloved’, ‘Lord’, or ‘Husband.’ In fact, a majority of the hymns in Guru Granth Sahib are
in the form of prayers addressed to God. In the Sikh tradition, two things are firmly established, having the
sanction of the Gurus. First, every ceremony, religious or social, ends with an Ardas or supplication to God,
invoking His Grace. Secondly, at the time of initiation ceremony (amrit), a Sikh is enjoined upon to recite or
hear daily Jap(u), Jaap(u), ten Sawayaas, Sodar(u), Rabiras and Sohila, besides reading or hearing of Guru Granth
Sahib (Sikh Rahit Maryada, Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee, Amritsar, 1970, p. 35). We thus
see that both in the hymns of Guru Granth Sahib, and the Sikh tradition and practice, this Creator-creature
relation is never forgotten. So much so that the Guru calls himself as “the lowliest of the low,” [1. p. 15] and
never does he mention another person as “That is Thou.’ According to tradition, the Fifth Guru declined to
include in Guru Granth Sahib a hymn by a contemporary saint, Bhagat Kaanhaa, saying, “I am He, O, I am
the same,” because this hymn was felt by the Guru to be evidently contrary to the Sikh thesis that man is not
and can never be God, though he can be His instrument.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
(ii) The arguments advanced to show the Creator-creature relation in Sikhism and the importance of
prayer, mutatis mutandis, apply also to God having a Personality. We need hardly state that this idea of
Personality in Theism is not analogous to the idea of limited personality in man, who is a finite being. In the
vety opening line of Guru Granth Sahib, God is mentioned as the Creator Person, the Timeless Person (karla
purakh, akaal moora?). \n fact, in all devotional and mystic religions, the idea of Personality of God is inherent,
since devotion involves God and a devotee.
In Sikhism, the idea of Will (4ukam, razaa) of God in relation to the created world is as fundamental
as in other theistic religions like Christianity and Islam. In fact, both the words hukam and razaa used in Guru
Granth Sahib are Arabic in origin. The idea of Will is inalienably linked with the idea of Personality of God,
the Creator, Who alone can have a Will. In reality, we know that Will and Naam are virtually synonymous,
both being the Immanence of God. While this point will be elaborated later on, it is well-known that in
Sikhism the highest ideal for man is to ‘carry out the Will of God’ [1. p. 1] or to link oneself with Naam.
Another fundamental characteristic of Sikhism showing the Personality of God is His Grace. One of
the chief points made out in Guru Granth Sahib is that nothing happens without God’s Grace. While it is
stated in the hymn of dharam khand, which lays down man’s duties in life, that man’s assessment will be
entirely according to his deeds, it is clearly mentioned that ‘final approval will be only by God’s Grace.’ [1. p.
7]. The idea of Personality, Will and Grace of God being basic to Sikhism, too, underlines its theistic
character.
(iii) The verses quoted earlier mention nature as the Creation of God, and not His Emanation or
Extension. Obviously, nature is a changing or becoming world, limited by space and time, and cannot be
eternal like God, who is beyond time (akaal moorat). Whereas God is Self-Existent or Self-created (swai bhang),
nature is the creation of God. While everything in nature is changing, i.e., is born and dies, God is never born
(goon). This is the reason why in Sikhism the doctrine of incarnation (avatarhbood) or God taking the human
form is strictly denied, and is considered heretical; so much so that Guru Gobind Singh described any person
holding such an idea as accursed, he being only a servant of God. [2.]. This is also in line with the hymns in
the Jap(u) quoted earlier. Here, the world is up to the Region of Creativity (Aaram khand) initiated through the
medium of energy or power (or). As indicated in the hymns of saram khand and gyaan khand, a fantastic
multiplicity of forms, shapes and things, including the moulding of consciousness, sense perceptions, mind,
intellect, etc., are described. Everyone knows that in Sikh theology, the highest form of being is the mystic
(bhagat). \n Japp, the Guru distinctly mentions, or rather limits the presence of these God-conscious or God-
filled beings (77n main Raam rahiaa bharpoor) only up to the Region of Creativity, but never beyond it, ie., not in
the Region of Truth or God (sach khand vase Nirankaar). The Universe is the creation of God but not identical
with God, which is the basic distinction between monotheism and Indian monism or pantheism.
(iv) At a number of places in Guru Granth Sahib have the Gurus described symbolically the state of
God when the creation was not there. All this indicates that God is Transcendent as well, and that He is not
co-terminus or identical with His creation. Not only does the creation not exhaust God, but He is both prior
to and Transcendent to His creation. And God’s transcendence could be envisaged only under a
monotheistic system and never in pantheism.
(v) An argument has been raised in favour of the supposed pantheistic character of Sikhism because
of the Gurus’, frequent mention of the immanent character of God in the created world. The Gurus have
clearly emphasized the transcendental character of God by saying that the world was created in time and
space, and the Transcendent God had been there while the world was uncreated, and, for that matter, God’s
immanent character was unexpressed. We refer to the hymn quoted earlier in this regard. It is also stated
that the Word was in God when there was no universe or form. The expression of Naam was prior to the
creation of the universe, i.e., ‘God manifested into Naam, and at the second place the world was created.’ As
stated already, Naam is mentioned as the Creator and Director of the world. It is true that the Guru quite
often mentions God as informing the universe. But in no scripture has the distinction between the
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Transcendent and the Immanent aspects of God been made more clear than in Guru Granth Sahib, because
God’s Immanence has been given separate names, i.e., of Naam, Will and Word. Evidently, all immanence
can be expressed only in relation to the realm of creation; i.e. when God’s immanence as Naam creates,
sustains and moves the world of name and form; when God’s immanence as His Will controls and directs the
becoming world; when His immanence as His Word informs and supports the created universe. In other
words, in Guru Granth Sahib both the transcendent and the immanent aspects of God are clearly specified
and distinguished so as to avoid any confusion or hasty conclusion that Sikhism is pantheistic. We have
already seen that in Sikhism the immanence of God in relation to the becoming world does not exhaust God
and that is why God’s immanent aspect has almost invariably been called His Naam, His Will, His Word.
True, at a number of places, the Guru describes God as informing the river, the fish, the boat, and everything.
Perhaps, it is such verses as these that have led some to the superficial conclusion of Sikhism being
pantheistic. But, all these verses are only a symbolic or another way of expressing the immanence of God. In
modern monotheistic theologies, including Christian and Islamic, God’s Transcendence and His Immanence
in the created world are accepted. Even in Islam, God’s Immanence is referred to as, “Is He not closer (to
you) than the vein of the neck.” [6.]. Such verses as these do not at all indicate anything beyond the
immanence of God, or anything contrary to the doctrine of Naam. Obviously, God’s immanence (His Naam
and Will) is manifested and exercised only in relation to the created and becoming world. This description of
His immanence and its operation, metaphoric as it is, can mislead no one to any erroneous inference,
especially because the Gurus have clearly stated that the immanent God in the universe does not exhaust
God, and He is transcendent too. “He that permeates all hearts (ie., Immanent) is Unmanifest too.” [1. p.
939]. “He is pervading every where Immanent) and yet He is beyond everything, beyond pleasure and pain
(Transcendent).” [1. p. 784]. “He informs everything and yet is separate too.” [1. p. 294]. “Having created
the world, He stands in the midst of it and yet is separate from it” [1. p. 788].
(vi) One of the chief objections to any pantheistic theology in the West is the lack of any ethical
content and impact in any such view of the universe. Pantheistic philosophies, whether in the East, as in the
case of Upanishads, or in the West, as in the case of Spinoza and Schopenhauer, lead to pessimism and
fatalism, and lack of moral effort and responsibility on the part of the individual. The disasterous ethical
consequences of pantheistic doctrines, including monism that downgrades the reality of the phenomenal
world, are too well-known to be detailed here. In this context, we may like to see what is the ethical content
and impact of the doctrine of Naam. In no religious system is the emphasis on ethical conduct greater than in
Guru Granth Sahib, where “truthful living or conduct has been declared higher than Truth itself.” [1. p. 62].
In Jap(u), the Guru says that man’s final assessment and approval before God will depend entirely on his
deeds in this world. [1. p. 7]. Further, ‘egoistic conduct’ has been called ‘the opposite of Naam’, [1. p. 560]
which, as we find, involves selfless and virtuous conduct, Naam being the treasure of all virtues. Similarly,
moral living is stressed, since the ideal in life is ‘to carry out the Will of God’, God’s Will and Naam being
virtually synonymous. Judged from the emphasis on virtuous life (the matter will be detailed while dealing
with the subject of goal, ethics, etc.) and moral responsibility in Sikhism and its anti-deterministic view, we
should evidently conclude that Sikhism is monotheistic and not pantheistic.
(vil) There is a philosophic controversy whether or not mysticism of all kinds is monotheistic or
pantheistic. Sikhism is undeniably based on a mystical experience. But so are religions like Christianity and
Islam which are fanatically monotheistic. It is well-known that many of the great Christian and Muslim
mystics have been dubbed as heretical, because their description of their mystical experiences could be
misconstrued to support a pantheistic view of God, even though these mystics were devotedly religious and
deeply reverential to their respective Prophets. Hence, the controversy hardly affects our argument.
True, some symbolic descriptions in Guru Granth Sahib, which, when seen out of their context, and
not seen against the overall background of Sikh theology and the overwhelming scriptural evidence to the
contrary, could be misconstrued to suggest pantheistic inferences. But, such a view would obviously be not
only far-fetched, but also opposed to the general thesis of the Gurus, which they themselves actually lived and
demonstrated for 240 years, and the concept of Naam. The metaphysical implication of the doctrine of Naam
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
clearly gives a monotheistic import to Sikhism, which view we find is unmistakably in accordance with the
accepted concepts in Guru Granth Sahib.
5. NAAM AND THE REALITY OF THE WORLD AND INTEREST IN LIFE
The greatest implication of the doctrine is in its proclaiming the dynamic reality and authenticity of
the world and life. “God created the world of life and planted Naam therein, making it the place of righteous
activity.” [1. p. 463]. “God created the world and permeated it with His Light.” [1. p. 930]. Since Naam,
God’s Immanence, has not only created the world, but is also supporting, controlling and directing it, the
same cannot be unreal or illusory. In fact, Naam’s immanence in this world guarantees its being a place of
righteous activity, and not being a fruitless, unwanted or capricious creation. In one form or the other, this
idea about the reality of the world gets repeated expression and emphasis in Guru Granth Sahib. “True are
Thy worlds, true are Thy universes, true Thy forms Thou createth. True are Thy doings. This world is the
Abode of the True One and He resides in it.” [1. p. 463]. “True is He, True is His creation.” [1. p. 294].
“Human body is the Temple of God.” [1. p. 952]. “Beauteous, O Farid, are the garden of earth and the
human body.” [1. p. 966]. “Deride not the world, it is the creation of God.” [1. p. 611].
It naturally follows from this doctrine that the world is real and God is greatly interested in it, since
He has created it. He ‘revels in His creation’ [1. p. 463] and is sustaining and directing it. In Japji, God is
described as ‘perpetually creating the world and benevolently nurturing His creation.’ [1. p. 8]. “God is the
One, Who works through winds, waters and fire.’ [1. p. 930]. This emphatic assertion about the authenticity
of the world is a clear departure from the Indian religious tradition, and is, for that matter, radical in its
implication. The Gurus were extremely conscious of this fundamental change they were making, and that is
why, both in their lives and in their hymns, they have been laying great and repeated stress on this aspect of
their spiritual thesis, lest they should be misunderstood on this issue. Living in this world is not a bondage
(bandban) for them, but a great privilege and opportunity. Not only is God benevolently directing the world
in which He is immanent, but each one of us is ‘yoked to His task and each is assigned a duty to perform.’ [1.
p. 736]. All this clearly indicates God’s or Naam’s plan and purpose in His creative activity.
This idea is also clear from the Gurus’ reference, again and again, to God’s Will working in this
becoming universe. The very idea of a God of Will clearly presupposes and implies a direction, and a goal in
the creative movement. The persistent interest of God in the creative movement is also obvious from the
fact that the Guru calls Him ‘the Protector’ (raakhaa), ‘Father’ (pita), ‘King-emperor’ (Padshah) and a ‘Just
Administrator’ (adlee). In Japji also, the Guru emphasizes the idea that God adjudges each according to his
deeds in this world.
Naam has been described as the “Treasure of Virtues and Qualities.’ As a loving God with social and
other attributes, He has been referred to as ‘Father and Mother’ (aataa, pitaa), ‘Brother’ (bharaataa), ‘Friend’
(mittar), “Helper of the poor’ (gareeb nivaaz), ‘Shelter of the shelterless’ (withaaviaan daa thaan), “Help to the
Helpless’ (adhariaan di dhar), “Remover of suffering and pain’ (dukh bhanjan), Merciful’ (raheem), etc. God with
attributes leads to three inferences. First, qualities have a meaning only in relation to spacio-temporal world,
since all perfection is static and all qualities are relative, capable of expression only in a changing universe.
We have already seen that when God was by Himself and the world was not there, the question of good or
bad, saved or saviour, love or devotion did not arise. Naam, being the source of all virtues, the world
becomes an essential and integral part of the plan of Naam; since without a world for expression there could
be no Will and no attributive aspect of God. Thus, Naam and the world are conjoint. Secondly, qualities in
Naam indicate clearly — and this is the most important aspect — the direction of the progress and the ideal
to be pursued by man in this world. Thirdly, all this ensures a logical and deep interest of Naam in the
empirical world, since its attributive expression can be made only in it. That is also exactly the reason why the
Gurus call the world real. Consequently, their message and mission also relate to this world, wherein alone
these can be fulfilled. For the same reason, the Sikh Gurus’ deep interest in all aspects of life, including
socio-political aspects, can be directly traced to Naam, whose devotees they were. No feeling or prayer is
expressed with greater depth and intensity than the one for the ‘gift of Naam” Now, Naam being the
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Benevolent Supporter and Director of the world, what can be the gift of Naam to the devotee, except that of
an enlightened, loving and creative interest in the world and in its development. How can one claim to be a
devotee of Naam and ask for its gift or link with it, and yet, decline to toe the line of Naam, namely, of
nurturing and furthering the process of creativity and construction in the world rather than becoming an
ascetic or a drop out. That is why the Gurus have strongly condemned all ascetic and escapist practices.
They say, “One reaches not Truth by remaining motionless like trees and stones, nor by being sawn alive.” [1.
p. 952]. “In vain are yogic practices, without Naam life is a waste.” [1. p. 905]. “All yogic austerities, rituals,
trance, etc., are in vain; real yoga is in treating alike all beings.” [1. p. 730]. “O Yogi, you are sitting in a
trance, but you discriminate and have a sense of duality. You beg from door to door, are you not ashamed of
it 2?” [1. p. 886]. “Jainic ascetism’’, or “even if the body is cut into bits, does not efface the dirt of ego.” [1. p.
256].
What kind of life the Gurus recommended will be detailed while dealing with the subject of goal, but
it would be pertinent to quote here the Guru’s dictum that “by despising the world one gets not to God.” [1.
p- 962].
In Buddhism, #rvana and samsara ate opposite entities. [7.]. In fact, in all Indian traditions, except in
the case of the saints of the Radical Bhakti movement, worldly life had normally to be given up in order to
pursue the spiritual ideal. But according to Guru Granth Sahib, it is not Naam and samsara that are opposed,
but Naam and haumain (egoism); [1. pp. 560,1092] it is not worldly activity, as such, that has to be given
up, but it is only egoistic and selfish activities that have to be shed. [1. pp. 522, 1246, 661]. Otherwise, belief
in a God of attributes, which involves expression in the world of man, becomes meaningless.
The best undestanding of the kind of interest in life the Gurus recommended for their disciples is
gained from the lives they lived themselves. We shall revert to this point in detail while dealing with the issue
of goal. Suffice it to say here that the Gurus, in harmony with the ethics of Naam, went in for full
patticipation in life. For them it would have been incongruous on one hand to call life as real and on the
other hand to fight shy of taking up the challenges of the socio-political life of their times.
All this was an ideological, deliberate and clear departure from the Indian religious tradition and the
Gurus gave a firm lead on this new path. While eulogizing the role of the Sikh Gurus in this regard, N. Ray
laments the abject surrender to the vicious status quo on the part of the saints of the Bhakti movement. [4].
6. NAAM AND ETHICS
On one hand, Naam being (a) the Sustainer and Director of the universe, (b) opposed to egoism
(haumain) and (c) treasure of all qualities, lays down the standard of its ethics and on the other, points out that
the universe is the plane and place where the qualities of Naam have to be expressed, so as to counteract and
remove the vices of egoism and the practice of a sense of duality. Egoism involves separatism, selfishness,
and individualism leading to the vices of greed, anger, pride, passion, conflict, wars, etc. “The removal of
duality is the way of God, [1. p. 126] Naam being the opposite of ego, the same has been indicated as the
only remedy for egoism, pain and frustration. [1. p. 1205]. In the same context, the Gurus have mentioned
two sets of people — one, the self-faced (manmukh) or egoistic, following the ethics of egoism and
selfishness, and the other, the superman or God-faced (gurmukh), following the ethics of Naam in all phases of
human activity. The ethics of Naam chooses its duties, virtues and value-system as consonant with the
standard of Naam or a unitary view of life. Following are some of the verses in Guru Granth Sahib
condemning egoism and duality and instead recommending the virtues and spirit of Naam so as to avoid and
eliminate the vices of egoism :
“In the grip of maya, we grab what belongs to others.” [1. p. 715].
“Man gathers riches by making others miserable.” [1. p. 889].
“Human passions, ego, duality lead us away from God.” [1. p. 647].
“God does not come near a person hard of heart and with a sense of duality.” [1. p. 751].
“Some people shun meat, but devour men.” [1. p. 1289]. “With God, only the deeds that one does in the
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
world are of any avail.” [1. p. 1383]. “Goodness, righteousness, virtue and the giving up of vice are the ways
to realize the essence of God.” [1. p. 418]. ‘God’s riches belong to all, and it is the world that makes
distinctions.” [1. p. 1171].
Thus, the entire progress of man is from being an egoist to being a man of Naam by shedding egoism
and accepting the ethics of Naam, i.e., from being self-centred to being God-centred.
7. NAAM AND HUMAN GOAL
It is in the field of human goals that the world-view of Naam and its logic make a basic departure
from the traditional Indian view on the subject. On this problem, the Gurus’ views have not only been made
clear and precise in their doctrine of Naam throughout Guru Granth Sahib, but these have also been
emphasized and exemplified by their lives, which embody an unambiguous lesson on the issue. We shall,
therefore, attempt to consider the subject from all the three angles, namely :
(a) the doctrine of Naam,
(b) other tenets and principles 4d in Guru Granth Sahib,
(c) the lives that the Gurus led so as to lay down the ideal for others to follow.
(a) The Doctrine Of Naam:
Naam, the Ever-Creative Immanence of God, is engaged in directing the universe, which is real, to
become a qualityful world. Every student of Guru Granth Sahib knows that the theme of a large number of
prayers and hymns therein is a longing for the gift of Naam, or to be linked with Naam, e.g., “I am beholden
to Him who enlightens me with Naam.” “My Guru makes Naam permeate me.” [1. p. 40]. “Let me not
forget Naam, rest is all greed.” [1. p. 1247]. “I beg from You the gift of Naam.” [1. p. 289]. “He reaches the
highest stage whom God benevolently yokes to His Naam.” [1. p. 284]. “To ask for any boon other than
Naam is to invite pain.” [1. p. 958]. “To be imbued with Naam is the essence of true living.” “Pray, link me
to God.” [1. p. 701].
Accordingly, the highest ideal under the Naam Marga is to be yoked or linked to Naam in order to
take the world of man to a qualityful goal. In this context, the significance of a God of attributes has already
been explained. Naam being the opposite of egoism, this progressive movement is towards an ideal in which
selfishness and egoism disappear and qualities of Naam are practised. And to be linked to Naam only means
being its instrument and sharing the responsibility of this creative and qualityful development in the world.
One imbued with Naam not only takes part in the world without a sense of duality and selfishness, but also
strives to create a beautiful world of harmony and quality. Egoism is the cause of all pain, suffering and
conflict, which hinder progress towards the goal. As against it, the practice of Naam and its ethics, namely,
the unitary view of life, is both the ideal and the sovereign remedy for all ills and evils (sarab rog kaa aukhad
Naam), and the way to human development. “Destroy evil and you become a perfect man.” [1. p. 404].
“Give up evil, do right and you realise the essence of God.” [1. p. 418].
(b) Other Tenets And Principals In Guru Granth Sahib :
Let us see if the same ideal is prescribed under the other doctrines of Guru Granth Sahib. In answer
to a specific question as to how to remove the wall of falsehood obstructing man’s progress to become an
ideal or a true man, the Guru gives a categoric reply : “By working according to the Will of God.” [1. p. 1].
Again the same ideal of deeds (not of words, rituals, ascetism or even of yogic discipline) is prescribed in the
hymns of cosmography quoted earlier about the role of man on earth. It is pointed out that “all assessment is
made in accordance with the deeds and doings of man ...... By His Grace only the righteous get the insignia
of God’s approval.” [1. p. 7]. In Sikhism, God is the Creator of the Universe and invariably the prayer is to be
of service to Him. “May I have millions of hands to serve Thee. Service is the way to cross the hurdles of
life.” [1. p. 781]. “Be ever alert in the service of God. Serve God every moment and relax not.” [1. p. 647-8].
This in effect means to be of service in the universe, which is the authentic creative activity of God, who is
directing it towards a goal and with a purpose. This service in the universe is really the selfless and qualityful
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
setvice of all who have to be looked upon alike. [1. p. 77]. The Guru says, “Where there is egoism, God is
not; where God is, there cannot be any egoism.” [1. p. 1092].
In Stdh Gosht, Guru Nanak has very clearly specified his mission and goal and thrown full light on the
issue as to how he would lead his followers across. He says, “With the help of other God-conscious persons,
I shall help man to remove his alienation from Naam and God and assist him to cross the difficult hurdles in
life.” [1. p. 939]. Guru Nanak has thus clarified as to what he means by ‘carrying out His Will and executing
God’s mission of creating a society of God-centred men. The Guru says, “The God-man achieves the goal
and makes all others do so.” [1. p. 125]. That is exactly the reason why the Gurus have likened themselves to
a ‘servant of God,’ ‘a soldier in God’s Legion,’ or ‘a wrestler in the cause of God.’ The world being the
authentic creation of God, supported by His immanence, the service of God means the service of His
creation, namely, the world, this life and man. It is in this light that the Guru’s hymns in Sidh Gosht and
elsewhere have to be understood.
Here we may lay stress on two very important and relevant points : (i) The Gurus have repeatedly
indicated a continuing process of development, evolution and progress in the empirical world, and (it) they
clearly point out that further progress from animal-men or egoistic men to supermen or God-centred men is
not only possible, but is also aimed at. In the hymns of cosmography, already quoted, an ascending order of
creation, form, or evolution is indicated. The Gurus have stated that individuation was created by God and
‘slowly there has been growth from small organisms, insects, etc., to animals, and finally to the present
animal-man, with his subtle sense of perception, discrimination, reason, introspection.’ [1. pp. 946, 466].
“For several births (you) were a mere worm, for several births an insect, for several births a fish, animal, ......
after ages have you the glory of being man.” [1. p. 176]. ” ...... after passing through myriads of species, one is
blest with the human form.” [1. p. 631]. “God created you out of a drop of water and breathed life in you.
He endowed you with the light of reason, discrimination and wisdom ...... From a sinner He made you
virtuous and the lord of all beings. Now it is up to you to fulfil or not to fulfil your destiny.” [1. p. 913].
Further progress of man or animal-man, as stated in the hymn of Dharam khand, depends entirely on the
deeds of the individuals. Till man came on the scene, it was not possible for life to outgrow its animal
existence and alienation from God. So far, like other animals, man too has been living an animal existence.
But, the Guru emphasizes the opportunity available to man to become a superman, the highest ideal in the
world of creation, and thereby be the humble but active agent of the Creative God, as indicated in the hymns
of Sidb Gosht quoted above. “Man with his egocentric individuality is basically an animal, with all animal
limitations” [1. p. 267] and alienation from Naam or God. But, he has the invaluable capacity to come into
his own by breaking this alienation and establishing a link with Naam.
The Guru again and again addresses man to give up his egocentric activity and instead to rise to his
full stature and avail himself of this one opportunity. “After ages, this invaluable opportunity of human birth
is obtained, but one loses it for nothing; one loses a ruby in exchange for a piece of broken glass.” [1. p.
1203]. “Among eighty-four lakhs of species, man is assigned the supreme position, whosoever misses the
opportunity, suffers the pain of transmigration.” [1. p. 1075]. “Human birth is the epitome of fruitful effort,
but man loses it for a trifle.” [1. p. 1179]. “Human birth is precious.” [1. p. 751]. “You have obtained the
privilege of human body, now is your one opportunity to meet God.” [1. p. 12]. This is how we understand
Guru Nanak’s statements that his mission is, with the help of other God-conscious persons, to assist man to
grow into superman, so as to cross egoistic obstacles in the sea of life, and thereby to help the process of
evolution and creativity to supermanship, flowering into a beautiful world. Hence, the ideal is not only to be
a superman oneself, but with the help of other supermen to convert everybody into supermen. [1.p.295].
And this physico-spiritual ideal, laid down in Guru Granth Sahib, can be reached only in this world by
removing human alienation caused by ego (Laumen) which is opposed to Naam, and which can be removed
only by creative and altruistic living.
Already we have looked at this issue from another angle and concluded that Naam is conducting a
qualityful movement expressible and aimed at fructifying in the world of man. In the background of Indian
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
religions, this is the way to emphasize the importance of creative living in the world, as also of what one may
call, this-worldly interest of God. To say that God has moral qualities does not mean an anthropomorphic
description of God, but it is a metaphoric way of expressing the essentiality of virtuous conduct which alone
secutes progress as against the egoistic and individualistic activity of the selfcentred man (manmukh), who
generates forces of separatism, conflict, war and chaos. That is why the Guru also describes the God-centred
man (gurmukh), the ideal in Sikhism, as having qualities of spontaneous beneficence, love, help to the poor,
etc., essentially the same qualities as of God. In short, in the case of God-centred man, his love for God is in
fact transformed into God’s love for man.
It needs to be clarified here whether the ideal in Sikhism is linkage with God or merger in God.
According to the Gurus, man, because of his individualism and selfishness, stands alienated from God’s
immanence. Instead of serving God of attributes, man, in his ignorance and myopic vision, starts serving his
own self and fails to rise to his full height of being a conscious and humble instrument of God’s creative
functioning in the world. In His Transcendence, God’s Being is all by Himself in a Self-absorbed state,
without sign of any visible form, devotion, love or creative activity. In that state, God’s Will, Naam or
attributes are not expressed, since these can work only in the created world.
Second is the state when God’s Naam and Will are expressed and creative functioning in the universe
goes on. To talk of merger in God in this state involves virtually a reversion to the first state of God being
Self-absorbed. This is, therefore, a contradiction in terms, because while God is engaged in His Creative
Activity, there can be no question of the cessation of this dynamic activity or merger of man in the Self-
absorbed state. Besides, such an opposite process would be evidently counter to the expressed creative Will
of God. True, there are some hymns in Guru Granth Sahib where merger with God appears to be indicated,
but this merger or joining means only a link, as quoted earlier, with the Creative Immanence of God, because
merger involves loss of identity and can be possible only in a pantheistic creed and not in a theistic creed like
Sikhism.
Below are quoted a few of the hymns which clarify the issue :
(i) “His body and mind are imbued entirely with the hue of Naam and he lives always in the company
of God; as one stream of water intermingles with another, in the same manner his light merges in the light of
God.” [1. p. 278].
it) “The gurmukh is all admiration for the attributes of God; and he remains merged in God.” [1. p.
942).
it) “Brabmgyaani looks solely to God for all support.” “God lives by the side of Brabmgyaani.”
“Brabmgyaani is himself God.” [1. p. 273].
tv) “He devotes himself to God with his whole being and remains merged in his God.” [1. p. 286].
All these and similar other hymns are significant, because the idea of the superman’s identity being
different from that of God appears in the same hymn as containing, side by side, the idea of his apparent
merger in God. Evidently, the Gurus would not give two contradictory concepts in the same breath.
Therefore, the seeming symbols of merger only signify a link between the superman (gurmukh) and Naam,
especially as in all these and other such hymns, the superman has been indicated as a functioning and separate
identity.
We further amplify to show that the interpretation stated above is the only one that can be accepted :
(i) The Gurus do not lay two kinds of ideals for their disciples, ie., one of link with the Creative
Naam or His Will and expressible only in the created world, and the other of one’s merger in the Self-
absorbed state of God, even while the created world exists and is being dynamically worked by His
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Immanence. Nowhere in Sikhism is there the least evidence or suggestion of two alternative ideals or duality
of goals. Such a thing is contrary to the very fundamentals of Sikhism as expressed profusely in Guru Granth
Sahib and in the entire Sikh tradition, which is not only anti-ascetic and anti-withdrawal from life, but stands
for active participation in the world. Merger in the anonymity of Brahman may be the ideal in other Indian
systems or salvation religions, where the world is either an illusion or of a lower category, or where
participation in samsara is anti-spiritual, but it cannot be so where God is the Creator of this beautiful world,
which is the only field of His Will and Creative Activity. The goal is not heaven or salvation but love of
Naam : “Heaven cannot equal God’s Naam. The God-faced has no desire for salvation.” “I seek not power,
nor salvation; pray, give me the love of God.” [1. pp. 1078, 534].
(i) In Dharam khand, the Gutu has clearly laid down that for every one on this earth, the only ideal is
of virtuous activity and deeds, which alone meet God’s approval. The same direction is given in the Guru’s
dictum : ‘Higher than truth is truthful conduct or living.’
(it) In the Hymn of Cosomography, as discussed earlier, the superman is limited only to the Region
of Creativity. He is not merged in His Immanence, much less in His Transcendence, where the question of
the separate identity of the devotee does not arise. Any such suggested merger would even be contrary to the
clear denial of incarnation of God (avatarhood) in Sikh theology. For, a corollary of man’s merger in God
would be God’s incarnation as man.
(iv) Merger of the superman with God, without being His creative instrument, would inevitably
involve the re-absorption of the Immanence or Will of God. This would virtually be a request for winding up
all God’s creative activity. Such an ideal might be logical in religious systems where human existence is not
considered real and authentic, or is a bondage, or in dualistic creeds where the separation of the spiritual
element from the material element (prakrit) is sought. That is why in such systems, self-immolating asceticism
and calculated other worldliness or austerities have a logical and recognised spiritual sanction, but not so in
Sikhism, where all such practices have not only been considered to be useless and superfluous, but are
deemed positively harmful and un-spiritual, especially when the Guru’s God is Creative and Attributive, and
wants His supermen to be the instruments of His Will and of His Progressive Creativity. This makes one
point clear. The Guru’s language being symbolic, link, merger, or joining can never mean fusion, or loss of
human identity of the superman, and, thus, his ceasing to be a creative instrument of God’s Will, plan and
purpose in the created world. The ideal of simple merger or nirvana (not Bodhisattvic) would not be the
service of God or Naam or action according to His Will, but would rather be an anti-creative annihilation or
spiritual suicide almost egoistic in its content.
(v) The ideal of merger in God would be quite foreign to a monotheistic creed like Sikhism, which in
all its aspects, is anti-pantheistic and casts on the individual the responsibility of taking up God-centred
activity instead of self-centred indulgence. Harmony with the Will of God does not mean absorption into it
but free co-operation with it. ‘Our wills are ours to make them Thine.’ In other words, ‘identification with
the Divine Will on man’s part really signifies an act of faith and freedom by which he makes the Divine End,
his own end; it is not the recognition of the actual identity of his will with God’s Will, writes Galloway. [3.].
We conclude that the superman, towards whom the evolutionary progress is directed, becomes the
instrument of, or linked to Naam. This is the meaning of the ideal of one’s being linked with Naam or doing
the Will of God or being given the boon of Naam. The role of the God-faced is not only to be ever-creative
and altruistic himself, but also to make the entire social fabric creative and virtuous. In Indian religious life, it
involves a radical shift from personal piety and salvation to service of man in general, whose uplift becomes
the first and the highest love and priority in spiritual endeavour. Everyone is to be raised to the level of the
superman and treated as equal. This we have seen is the thesis of Guru Granth Sahib. Since all these ideals
can be pursued by the superman only in the spacio-temporal world, it is obvious that any supposed ideal of
merger, as in some other religions, is both foreign and contrary to the thesis of Naam. Just as in the case of
the art of swimming, no training or test of it is possible outside the pool, similarly, whether a person is self-
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
centred or God-centred, qualityful or otherwise, can be tested and authenticated only in this world of ours,
and that also from one’s deeds and activities during his participation. The aim is to be the instrument of
God and to fulfil the object of evolving supermen and making this world into a beautiful and qualityful place
of supermen, i.e., to create God’s kingdom on earth.
(¢) The Lives That The Gurus Led So As To Lay Down The Ideal For Others To Follow:
Having come to the conclusion that according to the doctrine of Naam, as laid down in Guru Granth
Sahib, complete participation in life is the ideal, we may see what kind of life the Gurus lived. The lives of
the ten Gurus are the best pointer to the goal of human life set in Guru Granth Sahib, since these constitute
the clearest interpretation of their teachings. In the Guru Granth Sahib, all kinds of social and political
qualities have been attributed to God and the Superman. Accordingly, it was the demand of the doctrine of
Naam that the Gurus take full share in the life of their times. And we see that this is, as it should have been.
Apart from the eternal problems of man, with which the Gurus dealt in detail, students of history
know that in the Gurus' times there were two malignant growths — the caste and the tyrannical political
system. The Gurus never bypassed them as being too mundane to concern them. Regarding both these
matters, the Gurus’ role has been revolutionary. In their hymns, they have forcefully condemned these
institutions : “The pride of caste leads to multifarious evils.” [1. p. 1128]. “Distinction of high and low caste
and colour, hell and heaven introduced by the Vedas are misleading.” [1. p. 1243]. “Kings are like tigers and
courtiers like dogs, and they prey upon peaceful citizens. The Kings’ employees tear up innocent persons,
and the dogs lick up the blood that is shed.” [1. p. 1288]. “The Mughals are made the instrument of death.
The people have suffered intensely, O God, att Thou not moved? ...... If the strong mauls the strong, I
grieve not. If the lion attacks the sheep, the master of the flock must answer.” [1. p. 360]. Their protest
against these evils did not rest at that. In the social institutions which the Gurus organised, caste had no
place. Four of the five Beloved Ones (panj piaraas) of the Guru, who were to lead the entire community of
the Sikhs were from the Sudras. After the political execution of the Fifth Guru, the Sixth Guru started
regular military training and preparations in order to fight the challenges of the oppressive political system.
The execution of Guru Tegh Bahadur intensified the socio-political struggle against Mughal misrule. Two of
the sons of Guru Gobind Singh sacrificed their lives in war, while the remaining two were bricked alive. The
Tenth Guru also laid down his own life in this struggle. It is not our object here to go into historical details
ot to assess the political impact of the Sikh movement. We need only to stress that as the result of their own
thesis laid down in Guru Granth Sahib, the Gurus felt a spontaneous spiritual compulsion to organise and
raise a revolt against the oppressive socio-political system.
Obviously, the lives of the Gurus reinforce the conclusion we have already reached, namely, that
Guru Granth Sahib stands for complete participation in all creative and constructive aspects of life.
8. WAY TO NAAM
Now, we come to the last question as to how to establish link with Naam, how to become God-
centred from a self-centred person, and what method of training to adopt on this path. Just as the attributive
God must work in the world, the training and transformation must also be in the world itself, and not outside
it. In Guru Granth Sahib the following five modes of training have been referred to :
(a) remembering God (Naam);
(b) keeping good company;
(c) developing a sense of discrimination;
(d) doing virtuous activities in the sense explained already;
(e) avoiding vices.
It is not our object here to elaborate on these except (i) to clarify an ambiguity which, we feel, exists
about remembering Naam and (il) to give a few statements of the Gurus on each of these modes.
(a) Remembering God (Naam) : There is considerable misunderstanding as to what constitutes the
remembering of Naam. ‘True, in Guru Granth Sahib there is laid great stress on remembering Naam (Naam
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Japanaa) and praise of God (sit saalaah). Accordingly, it has been said by some that this remembering, or what
Trumpp calls “muttering”, is by itself enough for one to link oneself with God. This remembrance is
sometimes also understood to mean yogic practices for the achievement of the so-called bliss as an end in
itself. We are not only unaware of any hymns in Guru Granth Sahib recommending such yogic practices or
any tradition in this regard, but there are clear hymns against the use of such practices as means to spiritual
achievement or as ends in themselves. In the very first hymn of Japuji, mere one-point meditation is
considered pointless, the way to be a sachiara is to work according to His Will. True, there are numerous
verses in Guru Granth Sahib eulogizing Naam and Its remembrance. But there are also innumerable verses
denying the utility of any mechanical means or mere repetition of words or hymns, e.g., “Every one repeats
God’s Name, but by such repetition one gets not to God.” [1. p. 491]. “With guile in heart, he practises guile,
but mutters God’s Name. He is pounding husk and is in darkness and pain.” [1. p. 1199]. “One mutters
God’s Name, but does evil daily in this way the heart is not purified.” [1. p. 732]. The important thing is the
motivation behind praise and remembrance. Flattery, sycophancy and hypocritical utterances cannot be
considered praise, because the motive of such utterances is self-interest. Real praise involves admiration, love
and devotion accompanied by an honest desire to follow as an ideal or imbibe the qualities of the one who is
praised, God in this case. Such praise is a pining for what we are not, with a humble desire to move in the
direction of the ideal. Praise, thus, is a spontaneous acknowledgement of the Glory of God and the desire to
please Him, not by mere words but by qualityful deeds. Similarly, remembrance or repetitive utterances can
be mechanical, magical, or ritualistic in nature. As against it, remembering can be a way to keep in mind one’s
basic ideals so that the frail human psyche does not falter or deviate from one’s chosen direction and ideals.
That is why, in the hymns of Guru Granth Sahib, the reference is not at all to any mechanical repetition but
to keep God in mind. Hence, the words used for the purpose are, Naam ‘being or living in one’s
consciousness’ (man vasai, or kare nivaas), ‘enlightening one’s being’ (Rare pargaas), ‘imbued’ (ratte), etc. This
remembrance is like keeping the fear of God in one’s mind while embarking on any activity or making any
decision. It is not an end in itself and seeks no magical or compulsive effects, but it is a way of reminding
oneself to take heart and courage to do the right thing. Just as in the case of ‘doing the Will of God’ and
‘being yoked to Naam’, ‘remembering’ is also inalienably linked with the subsequent decision to be made and
activity to be undertaken. ‘By dwelling on the Word, mind flows to serve others.’ In short, the praise and
remembrance of Naam, or keeping ‘Naam in heart’ is just the means to recall the lesson and the ideal
suggested by Attributtve Naam. It is an humble attempt to seek the Grace and Light of the Guiding Star of
Naam, to show to the weak and wavering psyche the path one has to tread and the direction in which one has
to move in life. The conclusion is the same, namely, that all deeds and activities have to be in life, which is
the sole test of the earlier training, remembrance and preparation.
(b) Company Of God-faced Men: The Guru writes : “Just as castor plant imbibes the scent of the
adjacent sandal wood, similarly, even the fallen are emancipated by the company of true ones.” [1. p. 861]. “In
good company, we become true and develop love for Naam.” [1. p. 58]. In good company, one becomes
good.” [1. p. 314].
(c) Use Of Reason And Sense Of Discrimination : In the Gurus’ system, use of human rationality and
sense of discrimination have a distinct and important place. Man’s faculty of reason is without doubt an
asset which other animals do not possess. Sikh theology being non-deterministic, man has a distinct moral
freedom and responsibility in the choice of his actions and thereby to bring about his transformation. The
Guru writes, “By use of discrimination or intellect one serves God. By discrimination one is honoured. By
discrimination and study one understands things. It is the sense of discrimination that makes one charitable.
This is the right way, rest is all wrong.” [1. p. 1245]. “Man is blessed with the light of reason and
discrimination.” [1. p. 913]. “One, in fear of God and discriminating between good and bad, appears sweet to
God.” [1. p. 768]. “We know right from wrong and yet fall into the well with torch in hand.” [1. p. 1376].
(d) Ethical And Creative Activities: We have concluded already that only moral deeds in all fields of
human activity are acceptable to God. God’s interest in this development of man can be gauged from the
fact that “He takes cognizance of and rewards even an iota of good deed,” [1. p. 784] it being “His innermost
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
nature to help the erring.” [1. p. 828]. A few of the Guru’s hymns on the issue are given below : “Love,
contentment, truth, humility and other virtues enable the seed of Naam (vision of basic unity and reality) to
sprout.” [1. p. 955].
(e) Avoiding Vices: Side by side with the above positive step it is equally important to avoid vices,
“With self-control and discipline, we forsake vice and see the miracle of man becoming God.” [1. pp. 343-4].
“Drive out lust and anger, be the servant of all, and see the Lord in all hearts.” [1. p. 866]. Control your evil
propensities and you become a perfect man.” [1. p. 404]. “Good, righteousness, virtue and giving up of vice
are the way to realize the essence of God.” [1. p. 418]. “Control cravings, and the light of wisdom will come;
then fashion this wisdom into deeds.” [1. p. 878].
We need hardly amplify the point except to say that the entite approach and the method of training
have to be interconnected and simultaneous. The remembrance of God, good company and use of human
rationality have to be the means to help man to undertake and do right kind of action and deeds, involving
productive work, sharing of profits, and looking upon and treating all alike. “The man incapable of earning a
living gets his ears split (for wearing yogic-earrings), or one becomes a mendicant. He calls himself guru or
saint, but begs for food from door to door. Never look up to such a person or touch his feet. He alone
knows the way who earns his living by hard work and shares his income with others,” [1. p. 1245] 1e., the
training of man has to be in life and for life. “My whole being, body and consciousness are imbued with
Naam. True living is living God in life.” [1. p. 684]. In the Guru’s system, the entire development has to be
integrated, good actions leading to change in emotions and attitudes, and change in motives and approach
resulting in good reactions and deeds. According to the Guru, “without good deeds no worship is possible.”
[1. p. 4].
Here is an important word of caution. We are not at all denying the basic sanctity of the mystic
approach and experience, or that the ultimate link with Naam involving the highest spiritual or suprasensory
experience is an act of God’s Grace. All we suggest is that according to the Sikh Gurus, the seeker’s way to
invite God’s Grace is through virtuous and non-egoistic deeds in life, and that after the mystic experience, the
compulsion for such deeds is even greater than before, since one is the creative instrument of the Attributive
Naam, dynamically directing and sustaining the world.
9. CONCLUSION
We recapitulate briefly our conclusions :
t) The Transcendent God expressed Himself in Naam that created the world.
i) Naam is the Creative and Dynamic Immanence of God, supporting and directing the becoming
universe towards (a) a qualityful goal and (b) the emergence of a society of supermen.
it) The Gurus’ system is monotheistic, since God is both Transcendent and Immanent, and the
world is His creation.
tv) The world is proclaimed as authentic and the sole sphere of Naam’s deed, interest and activity. It
is not illusory or of a lower category of reality.
v) Accordingly, all human actions have a reality and validity, and are immoral or moral, destructive
ot constructive, self-centred or God-centred, to the extent they contribute or not to the ethics of Naam or a
unitary view of life.
(vi) The superman is both the knower and the executor of God’s Will. After enlightenment, his
duties and responsibilities, as the agent of Naam, increase and become more purposeful. He cannot be a
silent spectator of this world, or a mere enjoyer of bliss; his bliss lies in being yoked to God’s purpose, giving
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
meaning to life, and hope and optimism to man, i.e., in Sikhism, the test, expression and goal of all mystic and
spiritual endeavour is life and life alone.
(vit) The way to establish link with Naam is through virtuous participation and deeds in all aspects of
life, which is the sole arena and test of spiritual and mystic activity both for men and supermen. It is not
possible to have link with God by ritualistic, ascetic or escapist practices or even so-called salvation or
merger.
The doctrine of Naam gives a clear clue to the understanding of Sikh theology and Sikh history. It
also explains vividly the ten Gurus’ attack on the socio-political institutions of their times, their martyrdoms
and military preparations and struggle with a view to creating new socio-political organisations and
institutions, and how all these were the logical consequence of a single spiritual thesis and the continuous
unfolding of a planned process, uninfluenced by local, social or political circumstances or the exigencies or
accidents of history.
REFERENCES
Guru Granth Sahib.
Bachitar Natak, part A-6 (33).
Galloway : The Philosophy of Refigion, Edinburgh, 1915, p. 654.
See, Niharranjan Ray: The Sikh Gurus and The Sikh Society, Punjabi University, Patiala, 1970.
Sharma, I. C.: The Ethics of Buddhism, Ethical Philosophies of India, p. 169.
Smith Huston: The Refgion of Man, New York, 1959, p. 214.
Stace, W. T. : Mysticism and Philosophy, p. 120.
PON ORs (Oo ee
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
5
SIKH THEORY OF EVOLUTION : HAUMAIN
AND PROBLEM OF HERMENEUTICS
DALJEET SINGH
I
THEORY OF EVOLUTION
The Sikh theory of evolution is a distinct and unique contribution of Guru Nanak to the religious
thought of man. We shall attempt to outline this theory of evolution from a manmukh (ego-conscious being)
to a gurmukh (God-conscious being), and how it is necessary to interpret the revelation or spiritual experiences
of the Gurus in relation to their lives, or their historical role, which is a product of their revelation; and why
persons drawn from pacificist or dichotomous religions have difficulty in understanding the system of the
Gurus.
Spiritual Experience Of The Gurus: Every prophet builds the structure of his religious system on the
foundations of his spiritual experience of the Basic Reality or God. It is these perceptions of the prophet that
govern his understanding of the world and approach to it. Guru Nanak’s spiritual experience highlights four
facts about the Basic Reality. First, He is the Creator, and is both transcendent and immanent, but He does
not incarnate. Second, He is the Fount of all values. Third, He, being Love, is interested in the evolution and
progress of the world, and is its Guide and Enlightener. Fourth, in view of the first three qualities of God,
the goal of the spiritual man is to be the instrument of such a God or Reality.
Individuation, Ego And Man: This being the perception, the Gurus envisage a clear evolutionary
growth in the organic constitution or consciousness of man. The Gurus say that, “The world came into
being by individuation.”! Evidently, for the growth of life, creation of an individual self or haumain (1-am-ness)
orf ego in every being was essential. For, there could be no animal life without there being in each unit a
centre of consciousness or autonomy, which could be both the guardian and guide of the individual being. It
is this centre of individuation that has enabled the evolution of life from the smallest being to the extremely
complicated biological structure of man. The Gurus describe the evolution thus : “For several births
(you) were a worm; for several births an insect; for several births a fish and an antelope.”? “After passing
through myriads of species, one is blessed with the human form.’ “After ages you have the glory of
becoming a man.” These statements of the Gurus make it clear how from the smallest speck of life, man has
evolved after millions of years and myriads of births. Second, although man is mainly an animal, he is
distinctly superior to other animals. His superiority lies in his two attributes which the other animals do not
possess. First is his sense of discrimination, i.e., his awareness of his own thinking process and his capacity to
deliberate over his thinking. The Guru makes a clear statement that man has, apart from his other
potentialities, a superior sense of discrimination. “God created you out of a drop of water, and breathed life
into you. He endowed you with the light of reason, sense of discrimination and wisdom.’ This clearly
emphasises that man has the sense of making judgement and choice, ie., a moral sense to distinguish right
from wrong. For, this light of discrimination is an additional weapon with man to cope with the problems of
life. The Gurus’ perception is basically different from the view of modern psychology, which believes that
man is virtually a determined being, and that his development and evolution are governed by the
environment, following a struggle for existence and survival of the fittest. The Gurus differ completely. For,
they emphasise that man should use his sense of discrimination or his freedom of choice in making a correct
decision. This freedom forms the base of his moral life, which is beyond the ken of an animal. They, thus,
completely repudiate the view that moral life is just a ‘defence mechanism’, or a ‘reaction formation’ for
survival to battle against the impact of environment. The Gurus state unambiguously that a social or a
civilised life is not possible unless man develops his internal discipline or moral life, which alone can make for
progress of man in social life, or in a multi-national society.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
The second superior attribute of man is that, although he is at present at the egoistic state of
development, he has also the capacity to develop a link with the Universal Consciousness, the Basic Reality of
God. True, presently man is at the manmukh (egoistic) state of consciousness, but he has the capacity to be
linked with the Universal Consciousness, or to be a gurmukh who works in line with the Fundamental Reality
by being its instrument. The Gurus say, “You have obtained the privilege of human birth; now is your
opportunity to meet God.’ “O man, you ate superior in God’s creation; now is your opportunity; you may
fulfil or not fulfil your destiny.””? The Gurus stress that not only is there hope for man and an opportunity
open to him, but it is also his destiny to rise above his egoistic instincts, so as to become a superman or a
gurmukh. And it is this spiritual progress of man, which Benevolent God is helping with His Grace.
The Malady Of Haumain: The Gurus repeatedly state that at the wanmukh stage, man’s greatest malady
that blocks his progress is his egoism or haumein consciousness. The struggle against the elements and
environment having largely been won, man finds himself incapable of dealing with his own species. All his
rational capacities and talents are still the equipment of the egoistic man, and for that matter, are governed by
his ego-consciousness. His intellectual capacities being subservient to his ego-consciousness, cannot be used
for the benefit of another person. Just as a man’s lungs cannot breathe for the benefit of another human
being, in the same way, his rational capacities cannot help being selfish, since they are directed by his ego-
consciousness. It is this organic condition of the present-day man, that holds out little hope for his ever
being able rationally to solve the problems of conflict, clash and war, at the individual, social or international
level. It is true that during the period of man’s civilised life, certain cultural conditioning for moral ends has
taken place, but the change is very superficial. The moment there is anything threatening man’s personal
entity or interests, his basic self-centredness is unmasked and works with unabashed vehemence and violence.
This is the spectacle we witness everyday in dealings between man and man, one society and another, and one
nation and another. And this, despite all pretensions to the contrary. The twentieth century has witnessed
the worst massacres, butchery, holocausts and wars in the history of man. Not only have there been large-
scale killings, but we have had the worst rulers who have not refrained from killing millions of their own
innocent citizens. It is a fact that our Einsteins, Oppenhauers, and Sakharovs have been just the instruments
of the tyrants who have staged Auschwitz and other crimes, and destroyed Nagasaki and Hiroshima. The fact
remains that greater the instruments of violence science has supplied to our rulers, the greater has been the
threat to the security of the people and the environment of the planet. For, the ape in man, or his egoist
consciousness, continues to drive the vehicles of violence that science has placed at his disposal. And he
knows of no other use of it, except to cater to his egoism and pride. Hence, the warning the learned authors
of Limits of Growth gave to the present day man : “The outcome can only be disastrous, whether due to
selfishness of individual countries that continue to act purely in their own interest, or to a power struggle
between the developing and the developed nations. The world system is simply not ample enough, nor
generous enough, to accommodate much longer such egocentric and conflicting behaviour of its inhabitants.”
Unfortunately, despite about a quarter of a century having elapsed since this warning was given, neither
human behaviour, nor the behaviour of nations has changed materially to curb the drive towards
destruction. In fact, the gap between the rich and the poor nations has been widening as also between the
rich and the poor of a nation.
Schweitzer, who made a survey of the entire field of Greek and Western thought and philosophy,
came to the dismal conclusion that there is no trace of the ethical in the working of the world, or any sound
basis for ethics in the present-day thought of man. He could discover nothing of purposive evolution in the
material world or our thinking by which our activities could acquire a meaning. Nor is the ethical to be found
in any form in the world process. We can only describe more and more minutely the phenomena of the
world. But neither science nor thought has been able to find any meaning, purpose or direction in the world
process, except a drive towards death and meaninglessness.? Schumacker also sounds the same plaintive note
saying that nothing is more in disarray than the ethical thought of man.!° Consequently, both the working of
man in the present century and his present day thought do not hold out any hope for mankind.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
The Gurus’ Solution And The Theory Of Spiritual Evolution : It is in the above context that the Gurus not
only hold out hope of progress for man, but also lay down the path of human evolution. That path is
through a moral life. This is so for two reasons. First, God alone is the Source of all morality. This is, for
the Gurus, not a mere assumption, but a truth which they have intuitively or mystically perceived. We find
that in the processes of the world and its thought and science, there is no trace of the ethical. As against it,
the Gurus emphasise that the Basic Reality is not only ethical and the Ocean of Values, but is working the
world towards a life of morality, harmony and love. They repeatedly stress their spiritual experience about
the Fatherhood of God, the consequent brotherhood of man and the direction of the Universal
Consciousness to create and evolve the superman or the gurmukh, who being linked to the Universal
Consciousness, will work according to its direction. The Gurus, thus, explain that there is no midway
between ego-consciousness and Naam or God-consciousness. They state, “There is conflict between Naam
and haumein, the two cannot be at one place.”!! The necessity of the goal of progress from manmukh to
gurmukh, ot ego-consciousness to God-consciousness or link with Universal Consciousness, is the spiritual
thesis of the Gurus laid down in Guru Granth Sahib, and they lived and demonstrated it for a period of
about 240 years. This thesis of evolution, the role prescribed for the superman, and the methodology of
progress, have been clearly stated by the Gurus. They say, “God created first Himself, then baumein (sense of
individuation), third maya (multifarious beings and entities), and at the fourth place, gurmukh, who always lives
truthfully.”!2. This hymn clearly conveys the Sikh theory of evolution, and meaning, direction and hope for
man. The concept that the world has been made for contemplated evolution of the superman (gurnmukh), and
for the practice of truth or righeousness, is fundamental to the Sikh thought. This emphasises that God has
made the earth for a serious purpose and with a specific goal. On one hand, it lays down that it is essential to
have an integral combination between the spiritual and empirical dimensions of man, for, this will break his
alienation from the Basic Reality, the only source of love, strength and knowledge. On the other hand, it will
ensure his link with the Fount of Love, Energy, Freedom and Creation, thereby giving him an optimistic and
whole-life world-view, and eliminating his sense of loneliness, frustration and sorrow. Instead, it will give him
strength and confidence to strive and sacrifice to serve God as His meaningful instrument. In answer to a
question of the Sidhas, Guru Nanak clearly replies. “It is for the God-conscious beings (gurmukhs) that our
True God has established the earth”!3 Repeatedly, the Guru stresses that the earth has been created for the
sole purpose of practising truth or righteousness. In his very first long hymn, called Japwj, Guru Nanak
records : “In the midst of fire, water, nether regions, nights, seasons, dates and days, the earth has been
established as a place for the practice of righteousness.”'4 Again, the Guru repeats : “He created the earth,
the Abode of Righteousness.”!5 The same thought about the purpose of creation is stressed in, “God created
the world, He planted Naam in it, and made it the place for righteous activity.”!© Hence, in Guru Nanak’s
spiritual experience, the theory of God’s purpose in creating the earth, of the evolution of the gurmukh, and of
the earth being a place for the practice of truth or righteousness is fundamental. The entire thesis of the
Gurus is a superstructure on this base, and the lives of the Ten Gurus are a demonstration of the system.
The second part of the thesis is the role of the superman. Guru Nanak, while indicating the uselessness of
some ascetic disciplines, clearly concludes that to be a sachiara or a superman, one has to work according to
the Will of God, which he calls Altruistic. In their bam, the Gurus profusely indicate the innumerable
attributes of God, including help and shelter to the weak, and destruction of the evil-minded. The Guru says,
“Friends ask me what is the mark of the Lord. He is all Love, rest He is ineffable!’ It is in this light that
Guru Nanak says, “If you want to play the game of love, come with your head on your palm, and waver
not.”!§ It means that life is a game of love; God being All Love, He is working the world with His Altruistic
Will. That is also why Guru Nanak emphasises. “Truth is higher than everything; higher still is truthful
living.”!9 Further, the Guru says, “Love, contentment, truth, humility and other virtues enable the seed of
Naam to sprout.”20 “With self-control and discipline, we forsake vice, and see the miracle of man becoming
God.”2!_ “Good, righteousness, virtues and the giving up of vice are the ways to realize the essence of
God.” “God created the world of life and planted Naam therein, making it the place for righteous
activity.”25
The quotations above and the thesis of the Gurus, lay stress on four points. First, that moral
conditioning apart, at the present stage of man, he is imperfect, being only ego-conscious, which is his
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
greatest limitation, and is also the cause of his conflict, wars, poverty and other problems. Second, that
although, like the animals, his working is largely determined by the processes of cause and effect, he has,
unlike other animals, the capacity to gain freedom of functioning through a moral life. Third, and this is their
fundamental spiritual experience, that the Basic Reality is not only Loving and Altruistic, but is also the only
Source and Guide of altruism. Fourth, accordingly, man can be free, creative and altruistic, only through a
moral life, which alone, through His Grace, can link him to the Universal Consciousness, and, for that matter,
bring him peace, blissfulness, and harmony with his environment, physical, social and political.
Here we should like to explain one point. It is not suggested that the Gurus do not stress the value
of meditation, remembrance or simran of God. But these, they do not indicate as an end in themselves.
These are important means to enable man to pursue the goal of working according to the Altruistic Will of
God. This point stands stressed both in their bani and their lives over a period of about two and a half
centuries. The Guru says, “It is by our deeds that we are judged in His court’”4 “It is by our deeds that we
become near or away from God.” “Truth and continence are true deeds, not fasting and rituals.” “True
living is living God in life.”?” “Through virtue is one enlightened.’’8 “Imbued with His Will, he (gurmukh)
catries it out.”2? “Wonderful is His Will. If one walks in His Will, then one knows how to lead the life of
Truth.’° “They who know His Will, carry it out.”3! The above quotations, the hymn of evolution of
gurmukh, and the lives of the Ten Gurus, unambiguously emphasise that since God is immanent in the world,
and is working it, the only spiritual path is to be the instrument of His Will. And, that is why the Gurus say
that they are His soldiers or wrestlers. Thus, both the gurmukh and the seeker have to “live truthfully.” This
is the Gurus’ system of spiritual evolution, as embodied in Guru Granth Sahib, and as lived by the Ten
Gurus.
Religious Implications Of The Guru’s System : The most fundamental implication of the Gurus’ spiritual
system is an inalienable combination between the spiritual life and the empirical life of man. They have
stressed that there can be no spiritual progress of man, unless spirituality is expressed in life and deeds. This
is essential, because God Himself is informing and working the world, and the spiritual man can neither
remain indifferent to, nor step aside from, the mainstream of life. Its necessary implication is that there can
be no progress in empirical life, unless it is linked to the Spiritual Base, which is the Source of all values and
morality. This is the fundamental or the singular base of the Gurus’ religious system. This also explains all
the departures in principles and doctrines the Gurus made from the thousand year old systems and
traditions that had been in vogue in their times. Dichotomy between the empirical and the religious life with
emphasis on personal salvation has been the basis of all the Indian systems like Buddhism, Jainism,
Vaishnavism, Vedanta, etc. The logical implications of these religions were the institutions of asceticism,
monasticism, sanyasa, celibacy, downgarding of women, and ahimsa. In the Hindu system, caste divisions in
the social life had the religious sanction, but it was a discriminatory system, far from being just, fair or moral.
Spiritual and empirical progress having been declared inter-linked and inter-dependent, the other corollaries
of the Gurus’ system follow so logically. First is the rejection of asceticism, monasticism, sanyasa and celibacy,
and instead, the acceptance of a householder’s life, and the necessary creation of a society concerned with the
socio-political problems of man. The Gurus say, “One gets not to God by despising the world.” “One
becomes liberated even while laughing and_ playing.” “The God-centred lives truthfully while a
householder.”*+ The second corollary is the brotherhood of man, and equality between man and woman as
well. This was a logical step following from the Gurus’ fundamental thesis, but it was unknown so far as the
Indian contexts were concerned. For, equality between man and woman in the religious or social field was
nowhere prescribed in the religions of the world. But this was emphasised by Guru Nanak. The Gutu says,
“Spiritual path can be trodden not by mere words and talk, but by actually treating all humans alike and as
one’s equals. Yoga does not lie in living at cremation grounds, doing one-point meditation, roaming all over
places, or visiting places of pilgrimage, but in remaining balanced and God-centred, while conducting the
affairs of the world.” “Why call women impure, when without women there would be none ?”3¢ The Third
Guru, when he created centres of religious organisations, appointed women, too, to head some of them.*’
The third implication of the system is doing work in order to sustain life. Guru Nanak says, “The person
incapable of earning his living gets his ears split (turns a_yog/), and becomes a mendicant. He calls himself a
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
guru or a saint. Do not look up to him, nor touch his feet. He alone knows the way, who earns his living,
and shares his earnings with others.”3* In this and some other hymns, the Gurus not only emphasise the
necessity of work and sustaining life, but they also stress the necessity of fair distribution, saying, “God’s
bounty belongs to all, but men grab it for themselves.’ “Man gathers riches by making others miserable.’
“Riches cannot be accumulated without sin, but these do not keep company after death.”*! Fair distribution
of wealth, and censure of its exploitative accumulation are clearly implied. Guru Nanak’s acceptance of the
invitation of Lalo, a poor carpenter, and rejection of the hospitality of Malik Bhago, the local rich landlord,
also stress the same point. Fourth, as total participation in life and social responsibility in all fields are
desired, Guru Nanak condemned injustice and oppression in the social and political fields by the rulers,
invaders and others. He even complained to God for allowing the weak to be oppressed by the strong.”
This clearly implies that in the Order of God, justice, fairness and equality are the rule, and for that matter, it
is essential for the seeker, the God-man and his society, to confront and remove injustice and oppression. It
is for this reason that Guru Nanak stressed two points. First, that God was the Destroyer of the evil, the
Punisher of the demoniacal, and the Slayer of the inimical. Second, as a corollary of the above, he
rejected ahimsa or pacificism,** as prescribed in the other Indian systems. It is both important and significant
that this fundamental principle of combination between the spiritual life and the empirical life of man was
enunciated by Guru Nanak, as also the four corollaries thereof. Not only that, Guru Nanak himself laid
down the foundations of the institutional structures that were necessary to implement his thesis. He led a
householdet’s life, worked as a peasant, and organised a society, eating together from a common kitchen, and
at a common platform. Second, since he felt that the organisational structure had still to be completed and
nurtured, he started the institution of succession, and in selecting Guru Angad, a householder, as the second
Guru, he left out his son, Baba Sri Chand, who was of an ascetic bent of mind. He gave Guru Angad
instructions to organise and lead the Panth.4” Third, Guru Nanak rejected abimsa and described his God as the
Destroyer of the evil. Consequently, Guru Hargobind’s statement to Sant Ramdas of Maharashtra, that his
swotd was for the destruction of the tyrant and for the protection of the weak,** only reiterated what Guru
Nanak had defined as the attributes of God, who was both the Protector of the weak and the Punisher of the
evil, and who showered His Grace where the weak were helped.” Since the entire system of the Gurus was
against the tide of times and traditions, thousands-of-years-old, Ten Gurus had to work and demonstrate for
about 240 years their thesis according to the targets laid down by Guru Nanak. This explains the necessity of
the uncommon steps the Ten Gurus took, the new institutions they created, and the long period they spent in
training, motivating and conditioning their followers to tread the path laid down by Guru Nanak. In the
Indian context the Gurus’ system was so revolutionary that many a people, including scholars, conditioned by
their own thought and background, have failed to understand the essentiality of the measures the Sikh Gurus
took, and the spiritual fundamentals of the Sikh thought.
An important implication of the Sikh theory of evolution is that the Gurus attribute faults and evil in
the society to the imperfections of man. They repudiate the concept of a Fall, Satan or Devil. Nor do they
accept the doctrines of Atonement or Sacrifices for the sins or salvation of man. All such myths or concepts
are rejected. In fact, they declare that God is benevolently helping with His Will and Grace the process of
human evolution, and the gurmmukh has to be the instrument of that Will) The concept of Grace is
fundamental to the Gurus’ thought, because it repudiates all systems of determinism, mechanical or
environmental evolution, and the empirical logic of cause and effect. For, Grace implies freedom, choice and
creativity. As such, it is the source of morality. Thus, the ideal of individual salvation as an end in itself is not
there.
The concept of incarnation is also denied. Of course, immanence of God in the world and man is
accepted. Another major implication of the Sikh thesis is its universalism. ‘The Gurus do not assert
exclusivism. For, they pray to God to save the anguished world by any means. He may be gracious enough
to do.*° In fact, they clearly contemplate co-operation with other systems or God-conscious men. For, Guru
Nanak declared that his mission was, with the help of other God-conscious men, to ferry people across the
turbulent sea of life.>' It is in this light that we have to understand the hymns of some other saints in Guru
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Granth Sahib. Considering the exclusiveness of some other religions, Guru Nanak’s system is unique in its
universalism,
The Gurus also make another logical but significant change. As God’s Will is pervasive in the entire
world, the spiritual man’s participation and responsibility extend to the entire field of life and human
functioning. Since injustice, oppression and evil are a fact of life, and since these are the greatest in the socio-
political field, the man of God has neither to withdraw from any field nor to remain neutral. In fact, in order
to discharge his socio-moral responsibilities, he has to confront, resist and undo injustice. Hence, Guru
Nanak’s organisation of a Panth, rejection of abimsa and the inevitable use of minimum force to undo
injustice.
In short, whereas abimsa, monasticism, withdrawal, celibacy, ritualism and sacrifices are logical and
essential in a dichotomous system, Guru Nanak at one stroke rejected all of them. Because with his
perception of an Immanent God, who is a Destroyer of the evil, he created a whole-life system with the
acceptance of total responsibility to sustain life, and move towards a spiritual goal.
CONCLUSION
In sum, the Gurus’ theory of evolution from the present stage of manmukh (ego-conscious man) to
the higher stage of gurmukh (God-conscious man) is a unique contribution to the spiritual thought of man.
For, it repudiates all concepts of the fall of man or his moral degradation from an era of satyug to kalyug.
Simultaneously, it gives the seeker optimism and hope. For, God is interested in his destiny, future and
progress. There is no obsession with sin, nor any system of sacrifices to atone for one’s moral lapses. On the
other hand, it has been stated that man at present is at the stage of imperfection; and hence, like the infant, he
has to be helped to move and run, and not to be obsessively punished for not being able immediately to gain
speed. The fledgeling cannot be expected to fly. All the same, it has been repeatedly emphasised that God
alone is the Source of all spirituality and morality, and man’s empirical life cannot rid itself of its present
conflicts and wars, until it learns to draw spirituo-moral sap and support from Him.
Further, since Sikhism is universal in its approach, it claims no exclusiveness for its system, and is
eager and willing to co-operate with every other religious system that seeks or aims to give succour to man
and ferry him across the troubled sea of life, so as to reach the level of man’s chartered destiny, proclaimed by
the Gurus.
II
PROBLEM OF HERMENEUTICS
Multifarious have been the reasons for the inability of some scholars or others to understand the
spiritual thesis of the Gurus, and their theory of the spiritual evolution of man.
Revelation : One hurdle has been, especially with the so-called ‘modern scholars’, the issue of
revelation. All the world over, religious systems and mystics accept the reality of revelation, in one form or
the other. In their ontologies, practically all of them believe in the existence of a Fundamental Reality,
transcendent to the physical world. Many of them also conceive of its operation in the material world, and its
perception by supermen. It is this intuitive perception of the Reality by prophets of the world that has been
called revelation. The hymns of the Gurus repeatedly emphasise this truth, which forms the basis of their
entire spiritual system. Guru Nanak says, “O Lalo, I express what the Lord conveys to me to speak.”>* The
other Gurus also emphasise the same truth, “Nanak says the word of Truth. He expresses only the Truth; it
is time to convey the Truth.” “I have recited Thy Name only when You made me say it.”54+ “I have no
voice of my own; all that I have said, is His Command.”55 “Guru’s words are divine nectar; these quench all
spiritual thirst.”5° “Consider the bani of the satgvru the words of Truth. O Sikhs, it is the Lord who makes me
convey them.’’5’ “The Word is the Guru; my consciousness is the follower and listening to the ineffable
account of the Lord, I remain untainted by maya.’>% “The bani is the Guru, and the Guru is the bani; all
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
spiritual truths are enshrined in it.”5° Following their spiritual experiences, the Gurus declare, first, that there
is a Higher Reality than the becoming material world, which is His creation, and, second, that the Reality
informs the world, and graciously reveals itself to one who thereby attains the final level of evolution; i.e.,
becomes a gurmukh. Equally emphatic is the Guru’s statement that the superman, once in contact with this
Basic Reality, compulsively follows the Direction and Will (Aukam) of that Reality. Consequently, there can be
no peace or harmony in the physical world, unless man evolves to the final stage of development; and, in tune
with the Reality, moves in line with its Direction and Order.
Revelation of, contact with, or order from the Basic Reality, has been claimed by Prophets Moses,
Mohammad and Christ, as also by mystics like Eckhart and Hallaj. The lives of the prophets are the best
evidence of revelation. Their activities are the outcome of their spiritual experience. Toynbee, the celebrated
historian, observes, “They are not the product of their social milieu; the events that produce them are
encounters between the human beings and the Absolute Reality that is in, and at the same time, beyond the
phenomenon of Existence, Life and History; and any soul may meet God at any time or place in any
historical circumstances. Nevertheless, an examination of the social milieu will help us to understand the
nature, as well as the rise of religions in which this experience of meeting God is communicated and
commended to mankind as the inspiration for a new way of life.’
Significantly, in Sikhism, the claim of revelation has repeatedly been made by the Gurus themselves,
and it stands authenticated in the Scripture compiled by the Fifth Guru. In every other case, the scripture
was prepared by the devotees, decades or even centuries, after the demise of the prophet. It is a unique
feature of the Gurus’ system, and shows the great care they took to define their system, so that its purity is
maintained, and it is not misunderstood or misconstrued. Hence, the yardstick which we apply to assess the
claims of the followers of other religions cannot be used in the case of Guru Granth Sahib. Very sagaciously,
the Guru has excluded the relevance of any textual criticism, form criticism or redaction criticism and the like.
Even if the authenticity and validity of revelation is not accepted, it can certainly be understood and logically
deduced from its evident spiritual, moral and empirical consequences. Unfortunately, in modern times, the
burden of social science methodology is so heavy that even persons believing in the Transcendent Reality and
the intervention of revelation are not able to shake it off. Some of them tend to relate prophetic or revelatory
systems to empirical or environmental causes. To do so, is a contradiction in terms. Anything which is
revelatory, is from the realm that is free, and is ungoverned by empirical or the mechanical laws of the world
of cause and effect. The Transcendent, by its very definition, is beyond the empirical logic, it being a world
of Freedom and Grace. For, His Will and Grace have no causal relation with a world that is determined. It
is, therefore, pathetic to find persons having faith in God or the Transcendent, explaining basic religious
developments by social or environmental causes. Major social and historical developments have been the
product of a revelation or a spiritual event. For, by its definition, a revelation or a spiritual event cannot be
the result of a social development, although it could be the cause of it. In view of the bani in Guru Granth
Sahib, it is essential to interpret it and the history of the Guru period in the light of the spiritual phenomena
and culture, of which these are the product. For, God described by the Guru has an Altruistic and Gracious
Will, which operates in the world. He is the Ocean of Values, and for that matter, the Fount of all morality
and ethics. Because, morality has a significance only if man has the freedom of choice, and his moral activity
is undetermined.
Materialistic Explanations Examined : Following the empirical method of cause and effect, some
scholars suggest that Sikhism is a syncretism, or a growth occurring under the impact of bhakti, shakii,
Christian, Islamic or environmental influences. First, let us take the Hindu systems, especially its bhaki sects.
Guru Nanak rejected almost every principle of these sects, ic., their faith in the Vedas and Upanishads as the
sole scriptures, in samyasa, in abimsa, in the efficacy of rituals, mantras, fasts, pilerimages, and sacrifices, in
meditation and yogic methodology as an end in itself, in celibacy and downgrading of women, in the theory
of incarnation and personal salvation, in the religiously sanctioned hierarchical division of the caste ideology,
etc. In fact, no Hindu, except a sanyasi or bairagi, could be without a caste tag. Even in the liberal bhakti
system of Chaitanya, the priests were Brahmins.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Second, we come to the system of radical bhagats, like Kabir and Namdev. They were all believers in
personal salvation, in abimsa, and even in withdrawal and other-worldliness. Serious prejudice against woman
and matriage was there. Bhagat Kabir has been considered a misogynist,°! and Bhagat Shankradeva, a
contemporary of Guru Nanak, said, “Of all the terrible aspirations of the world, woman’s is the ugliest. A
slight side-glance of hers captivates even the hearts of celebrated sages. Her sight destroys prayer, penance
and meditation. Knowing this, the wise keep away from the company of women.’ Murthi writes about him
that “to trouble about the improvement of social conditions seemed to him as little profitable.’’> Whereas
none of the bhagats ever sought to organise a society, or to appoint a successor for the purpose, it was Guru
Nanak, who at the very outset, not only created a society with a common kitchen, but also started the chain
of successors, so that his socio-spiritual mission could mature and fructify. In fact, both Hindu sects and the
radical bhagats belong to the dichotomous category of religions, in which ahimsa (pacificism), withdrawal,
Sanyasa, and celibacy or downgrading of women, are religious values. In a whole-life system, all those are
rejected, and socio-moral responsibilities are accepted, and minimum use of force to discharge them is
approved. For, the very goal of life, ethics, and methodology in Sikhism, on one hand, and those in the
above two cases, on the other, are different, and, to an extent, contrasted.
The position of Christianity with its pacificism, monasteries and nunneries, and goal of personal
salvation, is no different. The syncretic argument, thus, is very thin. Since Jeremiah, for six hundred years
there were pacificist and other-worldly sects in Judaism like Essenes, Kabbalists and others, and yet Christ’s
originality has not been in doubt. But, in a country with a dichotomous and pacificist tradition of over 2,000
years, Guru Nanak’s whole-life system cannot rationally be called a syncretism, or a part of the bhakti
systems.
If we consider Sikhism a bhak# system, we can never explain how it was that in 1975, when Indira
Gandhi imposed Emergency Law and abrogated all civil liberties, it was only the Sikhs who organised from
the precincts of the Golden Temple, Amritsar, a peaceful and continuous protest for years, involving the
imprisonment of 40,000 volunteers, while in the rest of India of 750 millions, no social group, much less a
religious group, organised, or sent even two scores of volunteers for protest.
In fact, Vinobha Bhave, the spiritual successor of Mahatma Gandhi, called the Emergency a good
diciplinary measure. Mrs. Vijayalakshmi Pandit, sister of Jawaharlal Nehru, paid a handsome tribute to the
Akalis for their brave resistance to the Emergency. She said, “Punjab which had always been in the forefront
of resistance of oppression, kept its colours flying during the Emergency also. It was in Punjab and Punjab
alone, that a large scale resistance was organised against it. The worst thing that happened during the
Emergency was that a brave nation was frightened into submission, and nobody spoke, except in hushed
tones. In Dehra Dun, where I was, I hung my head in shame, and wondered if this was the Bharat for which
we, the freedom fighters, had suffered. Even those, not actually in prison, were no less than in jail. Only in
Punjab, the Akalis organised a morcha (protest) against this. Punjab’s lead in such matters should continue.’
The contrast between the socio-religious ethos of Hindu religious sects and that of Sikhism is evident.
Similarly, James Lewis, who made a detailed analysis of the syncretic theory, writes : “From this perspective,
it is reasonable to hypothesize that the syncretism appellation probably originated with English missionaries
ot some other group of colonial officials who regarded the Sikh religion as spurious.”
“If someone were to argue that ‘syncretism’ has lost its negative, judgemental connotations, we can
ask, why, then, are the major religions of the West never described as ‘syncretismsr’ In other words, there is
basically nothing wrong with the observation that both Muslim and Hindu influences are evident in the Sikh
religion, as long as one does not fail to note that the same state of affairs exists in other religious traditions.
Christianity, for examaple, was shaped by Judaism, Mithraism, Neoplationism, and other Hellenstic religions.
And, not just during the period of their birth, but also over the course of later contact with other peoples, all
of the major world traditions have been influenced, to some extent, by other religions. Why, then, is it
approptiate to refer to Sikhism as a ‘syncretism’, but not appropriate to thus refer to other religions? In other
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
words, if a faith like Christianity cannot appropriately be called a ‘syncretism,’ then what term would apply to
Christianity’s particular blend of influences that could not apply to Sikhism?
‘With a little reflection, it should be apparent that there is no clear criterion for distinguising Sikhism
from other religious traditions on this point. The covert judgement, and here we are finally in a position to
state the evaluation implicit in this seemingly neutral term, is that Sikhism can be understood entirely in terms
of its constituent religions, whereas other traditions are somehow ‘more,’ or that they somehow ‘transcend,’
the religions from which their costituents are derived. To restate this value-judgement as bluntly as possible,
the founders of other traditions were somehow able to provide a special (creative? revealed?) element to their
new spiritual synthesis that was somehow missing in the case of Guru Nanak.”
“T am, of course, exaggerating the point, but it needs to be made perfectly clear that the
characterization of the Sikh tradition as a ‘syncretism’ is a holdover from the days when all of the other world
religions were compared with Christianity for the purpose of demonstrating Christianity’s superiority.
Although I recognize that present-day scholars do not consciously intend to pronounce such a judgement
against Sikhism, the fact that ‘syncretism’ continues to be used differently to describe some religions but not
others, indicates that this judgement has not ceased to shape interpretation of the Sikh tradition.”
“Given the popularity of this state of affairs, it would not be inappropriate to postulate some kind of
unconscious fepression-projection mechanism at work that might explain the scholars’ lack of even-
handedness. One does not have to be a psychoanalyst to perceive that the guilt about the gap between one’s
ideals and one’s behaviour can be pushed out of the light of full awareness only to re-emerge as a projection.
In lieu of a better explanation of the one-sided treatment of the Sikh religion by Westerners, it appears to the
present writer that the relevant scholars are uncomfortable with the contradictions between the theory and
practice of their own traditions, but have repressed the problem and have projected the contradiction on to
Sikhism, a tradition that apparently (but not actually) contains the same contradiction. Thus, their
condemnation of Sikh militancy is really a projection of their own (unexpressed, repressed) condemnation of
the Christian tradition. The point here is not to criticize Christianity, but rather to once again point out the
different treatment that the Sikh religion has received at the hands of Western scholars. These kinds of
evaluative statements would have been less objectionable, had similar criticism been levelled against other
religious traditions as well.’’6
The argument about the influence of Islam is equally without substance. For, not only are its ideas
of Fall of man, Satan, Sin, exclusivism, Prophet Mohammed being the Seal of Prophets, and acceptance of
slavery, variant from the Sikh concepts, but Sufism, the face of Islam in India, was itself a system of
withdrawal and personal salvation. It never accepted any social responsibility, much less did it think of
confronting Moghal oppression in the state. In fact, like Christianity in the British colonial period, Sufism
took advantage of the prestige and protection Muslim rule gave to it. It is on record that the Head of
Nakshabandi Sect of Islam congratulated Emperor Jehangir on the execution of Guru Arjun Dev. But the
greatest contrast is that while Sikhism raised the level, both social and moral, and the sense of self-esteem of
the lowest sections of the society, Indian converts to Islam continued, by and large, at the low level at which
they had lived earlier. Niebuhr, a distinguished Christian theologian of the century, had argued, “that because
of the evil in man and in society, Christian political action called not only for love but for an attempt to give
each group within society enough power to defend itself against exploitation by other groups. Although
relations between individuals might be a matter of ethics, relations between groups were a matter of
politics.”’°’ In the religious and political history of man, it is a remarkable achievement of the Sikh Gurus that
the socio-moral and political status of the lowest classes has nowhere else been raised to a higher level than
that in the Sikh society.
Apart from the contrasted ideological position of Sikhism with the contemporary systems, one major
fact alone demolishes the environmental arguments, namely, Guru Nanak’s religious stand about equality of
man and woman. In the religious or social systems of the world, there was not an iota of evidence to give rise
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
to the radical approach of the Sikh Gurus on this issue of socio-spiritual equality of man and woman; or of
social justice, as a whole, in the caste-ridden society of India. Not only Shudras like Kalals, Ranghretas and
Ramgarhias became leaders of the Sikh Community, but the Third Guru appointed women to head some of
the religious districts, when he constituted 22 of them in the country.®* Shankara calls woman, “the gateway
to hell.”’°? For Ramanuja, woman is sin-born. The position of women in other religious systems of the world,
including that of radical bhagats, as mentioned earlier, is certainly not of equality with men. It ranges between
her being considered a temptress and being regarded as second rate. No environmental theory can explain
this radical change Guru Nanak made. The only explanation for it, as stated by him, is his revelation, or what
he calls the Will of God, and His immanence (Naam).
Singularity Of Spiritual Experience Which Is Noetic : William James, who made a detailed study of the
religious experiences of mystics, clearly records that those ate also noetic in character, i.e, they give
knowledge.” This knowledge, as stated by Plato, is true and not a matter of opinion. Its authenticity
accounts for the certitude of mystics who are willing to lay down their lives pursuant to its call or logic. Both
Christianity and Islam give God the symbol of Light. Guru Nanak, in the very opening line in Guru Granth
Sahib, calls Him Enlightener and Gracious. While the Gurus clearly recommend the use of reason and one’s
sense of discrimination for moral purposes, they repeatedly emphasise that the real knowledge and guidance
come from His Will (raza). In fact, they call Him the final and the ultimate Source of all knowledge and
direction. Collingwood in his book, Idea of History, states, “It would be nearer the truth to say that in religion
the life of reflection is concentrated in its intensest form, and that the special problems of theoretical and
practical life all take their special form by segregation out of the body of religious consciousness, and retain
their vitality only so far as they preserve their connection with it and with each other in it.””! Toynbee also
concedes that “the historians’ point of view is not incompatible with the belief that God has revealed Himself
to man for the purpose of helping man to gain spiritual salvation.”’? Of course, there is a difference in the
concept of salvation as between Christianity and Sikhism. A Christian like Saint Augustine believes that
salvation is an other-worldly event, and he did not expect “the world to get better’; or “that the spread of
Christianity would ensure political and economic improvement. The earthly city of self-will would continue
to exist amidst the rise and fall of states and empires.” We have already stated that Guru Nanak’s thesis was
whole-life, and envisaged the expression of spirituality in the empirical life of man as well.
It is evident, as has been recorded by many students of religion, that there is variation in the spiritual
experiences of different mystics or prophets. The Gurus stress that the historical expression of their lives is
in pursuance of the spiritual direction and knowledge the Will of God supplies. The Gurus say, “They who
know His Will, carry it out.’7* “Wonderful is His Will; if one walks in His Will, then one knows how to lead
the life of Truth.” Bergson, too, expresses a similar opinion, “The ultimate end of mysticism is
establishment of a contact, consequently of a partial coincidence, with the creative effort which life itself
manifests. This effort is of God, if it is not God Himself. The great mystic is to be conceived as an
individual being capable of transcending limitations imposed by its material nature, thus continuing and
extending the divine action. Such is our definition.’
Importance Of History In Sikh Hermeneutics, And Unity Of Perception, Ideology And Deed: For the proper
understanding of a religious system, and in appreciating its different doctrines in their proper perspective, it is
essential to bear the unity of perception, ideology and activities in mind. Let us explain what we mean by the
unity of perception, ideology and activity. Almost every religion owes its origin to the mystic or religious
experience of some prophet. Actually, it is this experience which forms the real fount of the entire ideology,
mission and activities of the mystic. In this sequence, the first stage is the perception or the religious
experience. At the second stage, the saint, naturally, tries to understand and absorb it, and reacts to it. This is
the stage where reflective thought appears. This reaction constitutes both the ideology and proposed plan of
the saint for giving practical shape to the ideology. This ideology and plan are generally understood and
interpreted by others from the words expressed, or other means of communication resorted to by the saint.
This forms his teal response to his religious experience, and reflects his ideology and decisions made
thereunder. For example, if the religious experience of a mystic is that God is Love, is the Shelter of the
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
shelterless, and the Helper of the helpless, the mystic’s ideology is that God is the Ocean of virtues and a
God of attributes. In line with it, and as a reaction to this experience, he compulsively frames a plan of action
of love and help to the poor and the needy. Accordingly, the activities undertaken and the programmes
initiated and executed by the saint are the true reflection and projection of his religious experience and the
consequent ideology. The activities of the saint are only the form and shape which the basic experience
directs and takes. Mystics can rarely express in words fully the nature of their experience, it being generally
ineffable. And even if they do, the description is so often interpreted variously. For the same reason, even
the statements of these persons cannot always be very clear, being sometimes too brief or merely symbolic. It
is in the interpretation of these statements that students of religion and others make major errors of
understanding and deduction. But it is the deeds and activities of the person that portray truly and directly
his or her religious experience and ideology. All we seek to stress is, first, the inalienable unity of experience,
ideology and activity; and, second, the activities of the saint alone being the right key to the understanding
and appreciation of his or her perceptions and message. So often, mere statements, taken in isolation, have
been wrongly interpreted, especially by those distant in time and space. Because, howsoever sophisticated
these be, rational tools cannot rise above the prejudices and predilections of the person employing them.
We have, therefore, to re-emphasise the very special position of Sikh hermeneutics. We have no
access to the actual spiritual experience of the Gurus, nor can we be aware of the deliberations consequent to
the experience in the consciousness of the prophets. We are aware only of the activities and the expression
of their decisions. This expression is either in the form of words or deeds. Here comes a major difference.
In the case of almost every other system, the Scripture is a post-facto man-made construction, recorded
decades or even centuries later. The debate has continued as to how far the record could be true, considering
the known human weakness to remain subservient to personal or social influences. This handicap does not
exist in the case of Guru Granth Sahib, which stands authenticated by the Guru himself. The second point is
that expression in the form of deed has always been considered clearer than the word. This is for two
important reasons. The expression in words can at best be general or theoretical in nature. For, this
expression must seek to cover all possible eventualities that may arise in the future, and which possibilities
can never be anticipated or guessed completely. In short, word is the penultimate step in the expression of
spiritual perceptions, of which deed is the concrete, unambiguous and final step in a comparatively specific
flux of events. For this reason, it is easier to understand and less liable to misinterpretation than the word.
The second point about the word is that it is a secondary mode of expression, and, for that matter, it
can never be as clear and concrete as the deed. Language, at any rate, is always a pre-existing vehicle of
communication. It has its own changing nuances, and many a time, its roots extend to a distant cultural past.
Obviously, language, being a second hand vehicle of expression, its truth is more liable to misinterpretation
than that of deed which is not only particular to the author, but is also clearly related as a response to known
ot identifiable set of events. For this reason, apart from being accurate and direct, it is simpler and easier to
comprehend. Hence, our emphasis that by losing sight of the historical perspective and hastening to go by a
literal interpretation, we may so often miss the real meaning of the bani. For this reason, the lives of the
Gurus are of fundamental importance, to enable us to understand the real import of the words of the Gurus.
For example, in Asa de Var, the Guru sings :
“Sache tere khand sache brahmand,
7
Sache tere loe saache akar.””
and again :
. 8
“Koor raja Roor parja koor sabha sansar. ve
To a casual reader, these hymns would appear discrepant, which they are not, if one keeps in view,
how the Gurus led their lives. The first hymn stresses the reality of the world, so that we do not withdraw
from it, and instead, ensure responsible participation. The second hymn, while referring to life’s evanescence,
deprecates lust for power and wealth, and describes it as vain. For, in the Japuji, Guru Nanak clearly
prescribes that the goal is to work in life, in line with the Altruistic Will of God. The truth of the hymns
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
becomes explicit, when we keep in mind, how in their lives the Gurus worked, struggled and suffered their
martyrdoms. The Tenth Nanak, almost from his childhood, had to face a most intense strife, which, for any
ordinary human being would have been impossible to bear, because of its pressures, anguish and tragedies.
This being the context, it is impossible to conclude that the Gurus considered life to be false and illusory. In
the absence of a close study of the lives of the Gurus, it is not possible to be clear about the subtleties and
depths of the bani. Hence, the fundamental importance of the exemplary lives of the Gurus in Sikh
hermeneutics. The bani says that those who know His Will, carry it out. It was the Altruistic Will of God that
the Gurus were following in their lives.
In the above context, let us see what the Guru did for us to remove all possibilites of
misunderstanding or misinterpretation. In the case of the Word, the Guru himself authenticated it. As to the
clearly understandable expression of the deed, Guru Nanak lived for us in ten lives for 240 years. He lived,
worked, struggled, organised a Panth, sacrificed self and family, while facing all sets of events, eventualities
and milieus, social and political. The above are the two unique steps Guru Nanak has taken to make his
system clear to us, and to solve our problems of interpretation. Hence, the fundamental importance of the
history of the Guru period in Sikh hermeneutics.
Sikhism And Its Historical Rok : Revelation does not mean that the students of religions should not
seek to synchronize the historical events with the spiritual thesis of the mystic. In fact, our emphasis is that
Sikh history is a product of the Sikh thesis, which is a revelation. In this short essay, it is not possible for us
to portray all the historical events that have followed from the Gurus’ spiritual view of life. But we shall refer
to only two points.
(a) Social Responsibility : Gura Nanak prescribed four empirical responsibilities for the spiritual man,
namely, to secure the brotherhood of man, second, the importance of work and sustenance of life, third, fair
distribution of wealth and the bounties of nature, and fourth, justice in society and confrontation with the
unjust and the oppressor of the weak. Hardly a prophet or bhagas, in the statement of his thesis, has so clearly
enumerated the faults of the contemporary socio-political life, as did Guru Nanak. These four components
of empirical life, provided the structural foundations of related new institutions, so that his successors could
develop them to fructify. Although the evolutionary processes in socio-political life and conditioning have
always been extremely slow, yet progress in the four fields has been visibly significant. Equality in the Sikh
society has been distinctly at a comparatively higher level. It was a fraternization unknown on the Indian soil.
Apart from bringing about improvement in social equality and human relations, the very moment Banda
gained political power, he undertook distribution of land among the peasantry so as to raise the economic
level of the lowest people in the state. And, it is well-known that the Sikh masses constitute the real strength
of the Sikh community.
The second achievement is the work habit among the Sikhs, for which they are well-known the world
ovet. That the Green Revolution was first brought about in Punjab, whereas the wherewithal and pre-
requisites for it were as well available elsewhere in India and Asia also demonstrates their zest for work and
life. Further, it is significant that a very tiny section of the community in the country, Punjab, not only
suffered and survived extreme persecution and destruction, but also was able to supplant a mighty Empire
and repulse, once and for all times, the thousand-year wave of invasions from the north-west of India. And,
compared to his contemporary rulers in Maharashtra and elsewhere, Ranjit Singh’s rule was far more fair and
humane. He made available all opportunities arising in his administration, civil, political or military, to every
section of the community without any communal, religious or other discrimination. The ethos of his
functioning was such that neither was there any attempt at conversion, nor was there the least feeling of
revenge or discrimination against the Muslims for the persecution the Sikhs and their Gurus had suffered
during the Moghal rule. This is evident from the fact that in the Anglo-Sikh wars, the Muslim soldiers fought
with the same loyalty, zeal and valour as did the Sikhs. And the bard, who sang the swan song of the tragic
fall of this benevolent Administration, was a Muslim. This is what Gardiner writes about Ranjit Singh, an
unlettered man thrown up by the masses who represented the Sikh ethos: “The Maharaja was one of those
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
masterminds, which only require opportunity to change the face of the Punjab. The Punjab was not the
same, semi-starving, terrified, looted by the rulers and poorly clothed during his reign. It was a prosperous,
homogeneous and peaceful state with all the communities, Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs, fully satisfied,
partners in the Government, in the civil and military administration, and it was the happiest state communally
in Asia. The Maharaja visited Hindu, Sikh and Muslim places of pilgrimage. It was the only state in India,
which was the most prosperous, the most flourishing and the most contented.’’”? In contrast, in the Hindu
Poona of Sivaji, only Brahmins were the Ministers, Hindu codes were followed strictly and Sudras could not
appear on the streets before 9 AM and after 3 PM, for their shadows defiled the higher castes, especially the
Brahmins.
(b) Sikhism And Militancy : The second point relates to militancy and political objectives. Without a
close study of the spiritual thesis of the Gurus, there have been lazy suggestions mostly by scholars drawn
from dichotomous or pacificist religions, or from believers in the environmental evolution of man, that
militancy in the Sikh religion was the result of social or environmental factors.
Let us examine this view, piece by piece. First is the ideological factor about the use of force for a
righteous cause. Dichotomous religions apart, there is no religion, except Christianity, which, while
recommending a householder’s life, does not accept use of force, as the last resort, to discharge one’s social
responsibility. For, in them, withdrawal or sanyasa is never a value. It is so in Judaism, Islam and Sikhism.
For outsiders, it has sometimes not been easy to understand the position of Exodus or Torah in the Old
Testament, the Sermon on the Mount in the New Testament, and the Just-War theory of Later Christianity.
In the revelation of Moses, God clearly goaded Jews to attack and drive out the Canaanites, saying, “My angel
goes before you, and brings you to the Amorites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Canaanites, the Hivites and
the Jebusites, and I will annihilate them; you shall not bow down to their gods in worship and follow their
practices, but shall tear them down and smash their pillars to bits.”®° Out of the commandments prescribed
for war, one is, “Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth,” etc.8! Six hundred years later, Prophet Jeremiah suggested
pacificism against the Babyloanian attack. Later, followed the pacificist cults of Essenes and others. It is true
that Christ’s emphasis on pacificism in the Sermon on the Mount is unambiguous, and forms the
fundamental basis of Christian theology. However, since Christianity has become a state religion, the concept
of a just-war has appeared. Dr Walsh says that at present it is virtually the accepted doctrine by most sections
of Christianity, except the Anna-Baptists and a few others.*?
Evidently, pacificism and a whole-life system cannot go together. As suggested by theologian
Niebuhr, Liberation theologians and other noted Christians, the use of political action for a righteous cause
becomes inevitable, if social responsibility has to be discharged. Let us examine the position of two noted
pacificists of the century. Pacificist philosopher Bertrand Russel, who had courted arrest during the First
World War, suggested, after the Second World War, that in order to avoid the appalling disaster of a Russian
victory, threat of force, or, if necessary, actual use of force should be made against the USSR so as to impose
on it the rule of a democratic world government.®? Pacificist Mahatma Gandhi cut an equally sorry figure. At
the beginning of the Second World War, pacificists of the world wrote to Mahatma Gandhi for guidance and
advice. He felt distressed and baffled, but had hardly an answer. Maulana Azad writes that more than once
he thought of committing suicide, saying that if he was helpless to avoid it, he would at least not be a witness
to the holocaust.*+ But, as is well-known, later he became prepared to join the war effort, provided India was
given autonomy; and again he approved of the sending of Indian forces into Kashmir to maintain Kashmir
Maharaja’s accession to India and to repel the Pakistan-backed tribal intrusion.> The greatest constitutional
lawyer of India, H. M. Seervai, has examined the Mahatma’s principle of non-violence and come to the
conclusion that “there is little doubt that Gandhi used non-violence as a political weapon, and was prepared
to support, or connive at violence to secure political goals.” All this exposes the bankruptcy of pacificism in
human affairs, especially when a religion seeks to solve socio-political problems. The logic is clear in a system
that accepts social responsibility and seeks to provide succour for the poor, the downtrodden or the
oppressed. Injustice and oppression being the greatest in the socio-political field, in no way can these be
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
resisted or undone, except by the use of force by an organised society. Hence, the sanction for it in Judaism,
Islam and Sikhism.
There is a common misunderstanding that a doctrine of love, ipso facto implies non-violence. The
logic of love points just the other way. How can one remain neutral and unconcerned, or shirk using
minimum force, if the very person or the cause one loves is in jeopardy, or under attack ? Social
responsibility, or succour to the oppressed, is an essential counterpart of love of your neighbour. Inevitably,
love or social responsibility and pacificism cannot always go together.
Pacificism is consistent only where the ideal is individual salvation and/or withdrawal from life,
which is considered a suffering, m/thya or an avoidable entanglement. In fact, whole-life religions have
regarded the approach of withdrawal as escapist or self-centred.
In this context, we have to see what is the stand of the Gurus on the issue. Guru Nanak has defined
God as the Director of the World, the Helper of the weak and the oppressed, and Destroyer of the evil. For
him, oppression of the weak and injustice are not consonant with the Order of God. This implies that the
God-conscious man, who has to be His instrument, must resist and undo injustice. Since political injustice
can be undone only by a society, by the use of force, if necessary, it was he who rejected ahbimsa, initiated the
organisation of his Panth, and started the institution of succession, so as to develop and direct its growth and
to enable it to achieve the targets fixed by him.
Sikhism And Its Socio-Political Role: Some outsiders feel that the first five Gurus were pacificists. But,
facts do not support this contention. Guru Nanak himself directed Guru Angad that he had to lead a Panth.
The Third Guru, in order to expand the organisation of the Sikh society, created 22 districts of socio-teligious
administration, with a head at each Centre, covering almost the entire expanse of India from Dacca to Kabul.
He created new institutions to develop an independent sense of Sikh consciousness and identity. The Fourth
Guru founded Amritsar as a religious as well as business centre. The role of the Fifth Guru showed
unambiguously what part the future Sikh society would play. Contemporary evidence of Mohsin Fani, the
Emperor himself and others is clear. He prescribed the system of daswandh or 10% contribution of one’s
earnings by every Sikh,*’ and strengthened the institution of masands for its collection. These collections were
used for religious as well as political purposes. This made it plain to everyone that a parallel religio-political
society with deep motivation was being created. The masands also dealt with temporal problems of the Sikhs.
In fact, since Guru Nanak, as stated by Bhai Gurdas, the Gurus were called Sacha Padshah, and their followers
looked up to them for solution of their problems, mundane or spiritual. Mohsin Fani records that the Fifth
Guru erected lofty buildings, kept horses, and even elephants, and maintained retainers.88 He also organised
trade of horses and commerce. On his own behalf, and otherwise, he sent Sikhs to Central Asia to procure
and trade in horses. Gupta, the distinguished historian, writes that the Guru had, in every respect, created a
‘state within a state.’8? According to Khulasat-ul-twarikh (Persian), the Guru successfully interceded with
Emperor Akbar for reduction in the land revenue imposed on the hard-pressed peasantry.°? The Gutu’s
compiling the Granth was an obvious declaration of the ideological independence of the Sikh society. It is
because of the Guru's religio-political status that Chandu Shah, a senior official of the Moghal
Administration, offered the hand of his daughter to Hargobind. But the crucial event was his help to Khusro.
Mohsin Fani records that the Guru blessed Khusro, the rebel Prince, after Jehangir’s accession to the throne.
Indian historians like Jadunath Sircar, Latif and Beni Parsad, record that monetary assistance was also given to
the Prince. Beni Parsad in his History of Jebangir, puts the amount at Rs. 5,000/-.°! Both because of the
temporal status and political potential of the Sikh society, and the Guru’s help to the rebel Prince, claiming
the throne, the incident came significantly to the notice of the Emperor. Jehangir, in his autobiography,
records that for three or four generations, the Sikh Gurus had been successfully creating a society, and
thereby misleading the common folk, Hindus and Muslims. He, therefore, felt that it was time that he put a
stop to it, and, accordingly, ordered the execution of the Guru, as also the imposition of a fine and
confiscation of his property. The Dabistan records that the unpaid fine was demanded even from the Sixth
Guru. It is inconceivable that an Emperor in Delhi would take notice of a peaceful religious group, or order
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
such a drastic action as he did, or consider the event of such importance as to record it in his autobiography,
unless the development and aims of the Guru and his Panth had been considered by him of serious socio-
political potential and proportions. Had the Guru’s activities been felt to be purely of a salvation or a quietist
saint, there could never be any question of an Administration and the Emperor having taken note of the
organisation, assessed its likely effects on the polity, and ordered its being nipped in the bud. That the
development was both significant and well-known, and had invited jealousy, is also evident by the reaction of
the politically important Head of the Naqshabandi Sect of Islam at Sirhind, who conveyed his delight and
congratulations at the Emperor having eliminated the Fifth Guru.”
The other part of the story is equally clear. Obviously, the Guru envisaged confrontation with the
Empire. He could never be unaware of what would be the result of his help to the rebel Prince, who was
moving with his army, and had claimed the throne. Simultaneously, it is also on record that Guru Hargobind,
even in the time of the Fifth Master, had been having military training, and joining hunting parties.* All
evidence makes it plain that Guru Hargobind knew clearly from his father as to what course had been
followed by the Sikh society, and what were its future plans or aims. Otherwise, it is impossible to conceive
that Guru Hargobind, on the very first day of his Guruship, should equip himself with two swords, and don a
military dress. All this makes it clear that the socio-political objectives of the Sikh society had become clearly
visible, even from the time of the Fifth Guru. The Guru’s martyrdom was, from his own angle, a voluntary
step, taken to prepare his people for the struggle initiated by Guru Nanak. On the part of the Emperor, his
otder was a necessary step to stop the growth of the Sikh movement. In a whole-life ideology, martyrdom is
not an act of suicide, sacrifice or atonement, but it is a calculated step to stop aggression, if that could be
possible, and simultaneously an essential lead to prepare and strengthen the will of the people for the struggle
and sacrifices required to lead a religious life.
Guru Hargobind’s military activities are well-known. He created a fort at Amritsar, and the
institution of the Akal Takht, the symbol of the #7-piri system of Guru Nanak. It is clear that the Guru took
to the militant path as a positive step, and not under any social or political pressure, or for personal defence.
The Guru had openly declared his policy to punish the tyrant and protect the weak.?5 He kept 700 horses and
fought six battles with the Moghal Forces, several thousand strong. In one of his successful battles at
Gutusar, he lost 1,200 men. He even recruited mercenaries to train his people and to create a regular army.
The Seventh Guru, who on all accounts was personally of a very compassionate temperament,
maintained an army of 2,000, which was quite a sizeable force. Another political move of the Guru was
extremely significant. When Dara, a rival to the throne, was moving with his army, he met him and offered
military assistance.” Just as Jehangir never forgot Guru Arjun’s aid to rebel Khusro, Aurangzeb did not fail to
note Guru Har Rai’s offer of assistance to his elder brother claiming the throne. Significantly, the Seventh
Guru took this step knowing fully well that his grandfather’s assistance to Khusro had led to his martyrdom.
Evidently, had the policy of the Sikh Gurus been to avoid confrontation with the Empire, or to give up
militancy and socio-political objectives, the Seventh Guru would never have offered military help to Dara. In
the socio-political growth of the Sikh society, the part played by the Ninth Guru is very meaningful and
ideologically important. Governor Timur Shah, son of Ahmed Shah Abdali, writes in his Hakikat-i-Bana-wa-
Uraj- Firqa-i-Sikhan, that tt was reported to Aurangzeb that the Guru was creating a new nation, and was
making military preparations. On this, the Emperor conveyed to the Guru that if he gave up his political and
military role and confined his acitivities to preaching and prayers, he would be given state grants for that
putpose. The Guru declined the offer, and his consequent martyrdom’ at the hands of the Emperor is the
second major event in the Sikh confrontation with the Moghal Administration so as to inspite and steel his
men for the final confrontation.
The Tenth Guru’s militant role and his armed confrontations with the Empire were protracted, long
and decisive. From his very boyhood, he strengthened his military preparations, fortified Anandpur, and
proclaimed an independent political status. His clash with the local Hill Princes, thus, became inevitable. He,
too, recruited mercenaries for his army. After the great event of his creating the Khalsa, he invited the Hill
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Princes to join him in his liberation struggle against the Empire. Owing to fundamental ideological
differences, they did not accept the Guru’s suggestion.” Instead, they joined the Imperial forces against the
Guru. In this struggle, he lost all his four sons and his mother, but he continued the confrontation
uninterrupted and undismayed. It was he who deputed Banda to mount an attack on Sirhind,! and sent
hukamnamas to his Sikhs to join and support him. The message which his spouse Mata Sundri, later conveyed
to the Sikhs, made two things clear. First, that Banda’s mandate was to supplant the Moghal Administration,
and second, that political sovereignty was to be with the Sikh Panth.'!
Sikhism: A Miri-Piri System: The above facts should enable us to understand Sikh history as the
product of Sikh ideology. For, unless we grasp the intimate relation between the two, problems of
interpretation arise. Sikhism is a whole-life, mri-piri_ or sant-sipahi religion. The three terms are synonymous
and convey a single concept, and not a combination of two concepts. For, the Guru’s concept of God (True
Emperor) or spirituality is incomplete or partial without an essential and inalienable combination of the
spiritual life with the empirical life. Spirituality and its attributes have to be expressed in and to enrich the
latter. Empirical life, without drawing moral sap from the former, remains egoistic, chaotic and barren. In
Guru Nanak’s system, God Himself is engaged in the socio-spiritual development of man. He does not want
the spiritual man to withdraw to Him, but wants him to be the agent of His Altruistic Will. Man has not been
left alone by God to fight lone battles with Satan. He is a Benevolent Helper, enabling man to remove and
shed his imperfections resulting from his egoism at the present level. The spiritual man, as stated by Guru
Nanak, has to ferry others across the turbulent sea of life. The concept of personal salvation, as in some
other religions, by withdrawing from the empirical life is distinctly denied. A dichotomous system or the
modern concept of secularism, governing empirical life, leaves the society to devise its own ethics. Thus,
secularism has led to the appearance, in the twentieth century, of the biggest ruling monsters civilised history
has known. For, the Frankenstein of military power, modern science has placed with the state or its ruler,
virtually makes it impossible for the downtrodden or the weak to defy him or dislodge him from his self-
chosen path, howsoever evil or disastrous it may be.
It is a whole-life or a mir-piri thesis that Guru Nanak has laid down in Guru Granth Sahib; and the
Ten Gurus or the Ten gurmukhs have demonstrated for 240 years how to live it under all combinations of
circumstances. It is because of the completely radical nature of their religion that they took so long to show
in life how to live every aspect of their system, and thereby, to motivate and condition the Sikhs in their faith.
The lives of the Gurus for over 240 years are a lesson in interpretation or hermeneutics.
Guru Granth Sahib stresses that all the Gurus express a single unified thesis, representing the same
spirit.!0? Guru Gobind Singh has stated that they are all a unity, and express the same spiritual ideology. In
fact, he emphasises that unless this is realised and recognised, there can be no success in understanding the
Sikh thesis, and that it would be foolish to believe otherwise.!°3 That is also the reason that in the entire Guru
Granth Sahib, only the word ‘Nanak’ has been used to convey the authorship of all the hymns and messages
of the Gurus therein. This emphasis is not without meaning.
A superficial reading of the hymns of the Ninth Guru would suggest to an outsider that he was a
pacificist. But, historical evidence of Governor Timur Shah, quoted earlier, that the Guru declined to stop his
military and political activities, as desired by the Emperor, disproves that opinion. By his confrontation and
the consequent martyrdom, the Guru prepared his people for the final role the Tenth Guru had to play.
Evidently, he could not be unaware of the consequences of the rejection of the Emperor’s offer. And yet, as
in the case of the Fifth Guru, he, in order to help Kashmiri Pandits,!°* sought martyrdom as a part of his
socio-political struggle, and to inspire and strengthen the people’s faith in the mission.
Creation Of Khalsa — An Epitomic Event: The creation of the Khalsa was the epitomic achievement of
Guru Nanak’s mission. Guru Gobind Singh prescribed five kakkas for the Sikhs, including a kirpan. Quite
often the significance of the &irpan (sword) as an essential wear of the Sikhs has been missed. But, it
emphasises two important principles, which the Guru wants the Sikh to remember, namely, his duty to
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
confront injustice and oppression, and second, to stop him from escape into withdrawal and monasticism. It
is in this context that one has to understand the outstanding role and contribution of the Sikhs in fighting the
Moghals and the invaders in the 18th century, for Indian Independence in the 20th century, and during the
encroachment on all human rights and liberties following the imposition of Emergency Laws in 1975. Can
any historian or sociologist explain why in history no other political, social or religious section of India rose to
struggle or protest ?
Our conclusion is plain. Neither Sikh ideology in Guru Granth Sahib nor Sikh history can be
understood in isolation. It is impossible to grasp one without the other. For, each historical event, social
development or institution is part of a multi-dimensional process, which, in turn, is an essential and positive
empirical projection of the ideology of Guru Nanak and Guru Granth Sahib. As such, Sikh history is the best
explanation and index of the Sikh ideology.
Sikhism — A System Of Evolution: Sikhism is an evolutionary theory about the spirituo-empirical
development of man. We can never understand the human process, its psychology and its spirituality, by
experimenting with and dissecting the lower animals or examining material processes. Our scientific tools
cannot yield any information about what is not discernible in the life of animal or the state of matter. The
sufferings, trials, tortures and martyrdoms through which the moral man or the spiritual person can go
without flinching, cannot be understood by any principle of cause and effect, or egoism, which is the present
level of man. But the garmukh is as spontaneous in his altruistic activities and sacrifices, as the normal man is
egoist in his thought and deed. For, the latter cannot rise above his organic or constitutional level, which is
governed by his ego-consciousness. In the same way, the gurmukh with his universal consciousness cannot
help or refrain from being altruistic, which is his compulsive mission. Freedom, creativity, spirituality or
morality are virtually synonymous terms expressing a higher level of consciousness. Somewhat similar
thought is suggested by a modern thinker, “The inner world seen as fields of knowledge (......) is the world of
freedom, the ‘outer world’ (......) is the world of necessity.” “It is dying to oneself’, to one’s likes and dislikes,
to all one’s egocentric occupations. To the extent one succeeds in this, one ceases to be directed from
outside, and also ceases to be self-directed. One has gained freedom, or one might say, one is then God-
directed.” The only difference with the above thought is, that although the two levels have been clearly
brought out, one cannot be partially God-directed and partially self-directed. For, that would be a
contradiction in terms. The Gurus say, “Ego-consciousness and God-consciousness are contrary; the two
cannot be at one place.”!% For, the moment universal consciousness is achieved, ego-consciousness
disappears. In the case of a gurmukh, while earth-awareness is necessary, the driving force is his universal
consciousness.
The radical and revolutionary changes the Gurus made can be understood only on the assumption of
their revelation and universal consciousness. No rational, mechanical, empirical or environmental logic can
explain the originality of their thought, their mission and activities. An important fact to bear in mind is the
die-hard burden of the prevalent, religiously sanctioned and divisive caste ideology. There was nothing in the
contemporary life of Hinduism, Islam or Christianity to give rise to an ideology which instead of assuming a
Pall from satyug to Ralyug, or from the Garden of Eden to Earth, suggested an ideology of evolution.
It is in this context that we feel that any theory of syncretism or sociological, environmental, religious
or empirical influences would appear to be superficial and naive. Sikh ideology or Sikh history has to be
understood and interpreted on its own terms. It has been explained in Guru Granth Sahib, and has been
lived and demonstrated by the Gurus.
An atgument is sometimes advanced that whereas the Torah, the Old Testament, and the Quran,
alongwith enunciating spiritual principles and revelations, also prescribe civil duties, rules concerning war and
rituals, Guru Granth Sahib lays down no such specifications, and hence, it cannot be taken to be a scripture
recommending any role in the socio-political life of man. The argument is invalid and even casual. Any
detailed study of Guru Granth Sahib would show the Gurus’ wisdom and vision. For, while they clearly and
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
repeatedly lay down every spiritual and moral principle, and man’s responsibility concerning the religious,
social and political life, they scrupulously avoid any injunction about civil, cultural or social matters, which, by
their very nature, are always dated. We are all aware that many of the civil rules or shariat, provided in other
scriptures or holy books, sometimes become a problem for the devotees. Because socio-political practices
and matters, being always evolving and changing, rigid adherence to them in a future context could become
an embarrassing and avoidable limitation. Hence, just as the Fifth Guru, by authenticating the Scripture,
excluded all possibility of confusion or controversy about the purity of the text and the principles prescribed,
the Gurus have not included in the Scripture anything that could be dated. But, it should not be understood
that they have, on that ground, kept their followers without guidance. Guru Granth Sahib not only lays down
every spiritual principle that is universal and eternal, but also all the major responsibilities, moral and social,
which the seeker has to shoulder and discharge, i.e., regarding brotherhood of man and equality, fair
distribution of wealth, sustenance of life, assistance to the downtrodden, and struggle against injustice and
ageression. In addition, the more important lessons are the demonstrations and the lead which the Ten
Gurus have given over a period of about two and a half centuries in respect of almost every eventuality that
could arise in the socio-political life of the individual and society. It is for setting examples of conduct for the
religious man regarding every aspect of life that the Ten Gurus guided the Sikh society from its infancy to its
maturity.
CONCLUSION
Thought, as stated by Iqbal, is the internal and integral component of the deed, which is its external
part. In the case of mystics and prophets, unity between thought and deed is a logical certainty, because the
two are not the product of ego-consciousness, but these are the expression of the fundamental or universal
consciousness. There is no intervention of the ego-consciousness to distort the fundamental unity and
harmony of life. Hence, the deeds of the Gurus are the truest interpretation of their thesis and the bani. The
Tenth Guru has stressed that no success in understanding the Gurus’ system can be achieved, unless the unity
of their spirit is accepted. He says, “Those who recognised them (all the Gurus) as one, were successful on
the spiritual plane.” This reveals the basis on which the Gurus themselves worked, and how firmly and
strongly they believed in the unity of spirit, thesis and goal of all the Gurus. Therefore, what is of
fundamental importance is the spirit, faith and understanding of Guru Nanak’s thesis emphasised by his
successors, who were considered spiritually the most competent contemporaries who laid down their all for
it.
In the matter of interpretation or hermeneutics, Sikhism has a unique advantage, which is not
available to other religions. Here, we have nine successors who have uniformly lived and interpreted the
system of Guru Nanak. Three points indisputably emerge from the above. First is the belief and
understanding of the nine successors about his thesis. Second, they being the most competent
contemporaries and executors of Guru Nanak’s thesis, their understanding and interpretation of it is of far
greater value and importance than the post facto views of those who have a subjective commitment to a
dichotomous religion or a social science discipline or any other system, which, at best, is only limited in its
vision and scope. Third, the Gurus have lived, acted and proclaimed the unity of that thesis. Consequently,
the logical method of interpretation is to accept the unity of their spiritual experience, deliberation and deed,
and to approach the understanding of their spiritual thesis from the end of the deed. We have no ground to
think otherwise.
There is a major difference between the Sikh Scripture and other scriptures, which were constructed
by human beings, decades, even centuries after the concerned prophet had left the scene. Of the Christian
Gospel, John Hick states, “Our modern historical awareness is that Christian doctrines should not be
regarded divinely formulated and guaranteed propositions, but rather as human attempts to grasp the
religious meaning, primarily of the Christ event, and in the light of this, of our human situation as a whole.
The history of Christian theology is thus a part of the history of human thought.” In the case of Sikhism, it is
entirely different. Guru Granth Sahib is not only the authentic bani of, or revelation to Guru Nanak, but it is
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
also the authentic record of the understanding and interpretation of his five spiritual successors. They are not
human records of understanding, but true statements of unsurpassed spiritual value and authenticity.
By their living and deeds, the Gurus themselves have explained how to understand and interpret their
bani ot system. Guru Nanak laid down that the goal of man is to carry out His Will. The hymns quoted
above say that those who know His Will, carry it out, this being a spiritual compulsion, and that only when
one walks in His Will, does the Truth comes to be known. These wonderful statements give us a true
glimpse of Sikhism and Sikh hermeneutics. This emphasises the primary importance of the lives and deeds of
the Gurus. Consequently, in Sikhism, the unity of the spiritual experience of the Gurus, their deliberations of
thinking, and their deeds, has to be accepted in order to grasp or interpret their bani or thesis. This is what
they have stressed in their hymns quoted earlier.
The best, and the only way to truly interpret the thought of the Gurus is to understand and trace it
from their deeds to the other end of their spiritual experience. For, the Gurus emphasise that His Will has
compulsively to be followed, and only after following it, one comes to know of the Truth. Accordingly, so as
to interpret their system, their deeds have to be understood and given priority. Otherwise, any attempt to
understand their thought by ignoring their deeds will only keep us entangled in debates about what is the
correct linguistic paraphrase of their banz. This is like putting the cart before the horse. It is this egoistic
failing of the scholars that often results in numerous interpretations of the same writings. For example, the
Vedas and Upanishads have been interpreted differently by scholars like Kumarila Bhatt, Sankara, Ramanuja,
Nimbarka, Madhava, Vallabha, Swami Dayanand, and others. Many a time, a scholar’s interpretation is just a
piece of self justification, as has happened in the interpretations of the variant Parnalis of Udasis, Nirmalas,
Gyanis and others. For the Gurus, there was not only complete unity of spiritual experience and thought, but
they were all pursuing uniformly the same thesis, aims, objectives and goals during the 240 years of their lives.
Hence, all talk of multiple or different levels or methods of approach and interpretations is faulty ab initio.
The Gurus themselves emphasise that the sure method of understanding and interpretation of their thesis is
to start with deeds as the basis, which would give one a clue or glimpse of their spiritual experience.
Otherwise, we shall have the same crop of confusion as that of this Parnali or that Parnali, Western Parnali or
Eastern Parnali; and most of these would be products of egoistic self-justification or personal prejudices.
For the true interpretation of the Sikh religion, there are five unique events which cannot be ignored.
The first is that Guru Nanak’s system is a revelation. Second, that the revelation has been recorded by the
Guru or the prophet himself. Third, that both Guru Granth Sahib and the Gurus emphasise the impeccable
unity of their thesis, and that failure to understand its unity and integrity means failure to comprehend and
interpret its depths and truths. Fourth, that the thesis has been lived and demonstrated with love and
humility by the Ten Gurus for 240 years, thereby leaving no scope for ambiguity. These demonstrations have
been made by them as the unquestioned heads of a society dealing with all kinds of problems, and under
vatiant social and political circumstances. Fifth, as is the clear lesson from the Gurus’ lives, the kakka or
kirpan prescribed by the Tenth Guru, stresses not only that Sikhism is a whole-life or mir7-piri system, and that
Sikhs should live truthfully, discharging all their social responsibilities in all fields of life, but also that they
should never withdraw into the isolation of asceticism or monasticism.
REFERENCES
Guru Granth Sahib, p. 946.
Ibid., p. 176.
Ibid., p. 631.
Ibid., p. 176.
Ibid., p. 913.
Ibid., p. 12.
Gs OU Oo NO ee
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
7. Ibid., p. 913.
8. Limits of Growth : Report for the Club of Rome. Project on the Predictament of Mankind,
pp. 191-192.
9. Schweitzer, Albert : Civilization and Ethics, pp. 9.11-13.
10. Schumacher, E.P. : Guide to the Perplexed, p. 132.
11. Guru Granth Sahib, p. 560.
2: Ibid., p. 113.
13. Ibid., p. 941.
14. Ibid., p. 7.
15. Ibid., p. 1033.
16. Ibid., p. 463.
17. Ibid., p. 459.
18. Ibid., p. 1412.
19. Ibid., p. 62.
20. Ibid., p. 955.
21. Ibid., pp. 343, 347.
22: Ibid., p. 418.
23: Ibid., p. 463.
24. Ibid., pp. 1383, 9.
25. Ibid., p. 8.
26. Ibid., p. 730.
27: Ibid., p. 684.
28. Ibid., p. 931.
29. Ibid., p. 1423.
30. Ibid., p. 940.
31. Ibid., p. 991.
32. Ibid., p. 962.
33. Ibid., p. 522.
34. Ibid., p. 1376.
35. Ibid., p. 730.
36. Ibid., p. 473.
37; The Panjab Past and Present, Oct., 1976, Punjabi University, Patiala, p. 468.
38. Guru Granth Sahib, p. 1245.
39. Ibid., p. 965.
40. Ibid., p. 889.
Al. Ibid., p. 417.
42. Ibid., pp. 417-418, 360.
43. Ibid., p. 1208.
44. Ibid., p. 224.
45. Ibid., p. 145.
46. Ibid., pp. 1282, 472.
47. Bhalla, Sarup Das : Mehma Parkash, p. 326.
48. Gupta, H.R. : Hastory of Sikh Gurus, p. 114.
49. Guru Granth Sahib, p. 915.
50. Ibid., p. 853.
51. Ibid., p. 939.
52. Ibid., p. 722.
53. Ibid., p. 723.
54. Ibid., p. 566.
55: Ibid., p. 763.
56. Ibid., p. 35.
57. Ibid., p. 308.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
58. Ibid., p. 943.
59. Ibid., p. 982.
60. Toynbee, A. : An Historian’s Approach to Rehigion, Oxtord University Press; 1957, p. 75.
61. Juergensmeyer, M. : S’kb Studies; Berkeley Religious Studies Series, Graduate Theological
Union, Berkeley, California, 1979, p. 83, 88.
62. Murthy, H.V.S. : Vaeshnavism of Sankaradeva and Ramanuja, pp. 201-202.
63. Ibid., p. 203.
64. The Tribune, Chandigarh, March 13, 1977.
65. Mann, J.S. & Saraon, H.S. (Eds.) : Advanced Studies in Sikhism, The Sikh Community of North
America, Irvine, California, USA, 1989, pp. 270-271.
66. Ibid., p. 274.
67. Dowley, Tim : Eerdman’s Handbook to the History of Christianity, reprint 1987, Eerdman
Publishing Company Michigan, pp. 597-598.
68. The Panjab Past and Present, Oct. 1976, Punjabi University, Patiala, p. 468.
69. Jain, N.K.: S7&b Gurus and Indian Spiritual Thought, Panjabi University Patiala, p. 168.
70. James William : Varieties of Religious Experience, pp. 370-373.
71. Collingwood, R.G. : Idea of History, Oxford University Press, 1980, p. 178.
72. Toynbee, A. : op. cit., p. 132.
73. Dowley, Tim. : op. cit., p. 5.
74. Guru Granth Sahib, p. 991.
75. Ibid., p. 940.
76. Smullyan et a/ Introduction to Philosophy, pp. 358-363.
77. Guru Granth Sahib, p. 463.
78. Ibid., p. 468.
79. Diwan Singh : Revolution of Guru Nanak, Peoples Publishing House, Chandigarh, 1993, p.
227.
80. Torah :_A New Translation of the Holy Scripture (first Section), The Jewish Publication Society
of America, Philadelphia. 2nd edition. 1981, p. 141.
81. Ibid., p. 135.
82. Ibid., p. 139.
83. Russell, Bertrand : Unpopular Essays, pp 53-57.
84. Azad, Maulana, A.K.: India Wins Freedom, Orient Longman, Calcutta, 1959, pp. 33-34.
85. Daljeet Singh : S7k/ Ideology, Singh Brothers, Amritsar, 1990, pp. 48-49.
86. Seervai, H.M. : Constitutional Law Of India, 3rd edition, Sweet and Maxell Ltd., London, 1988,
pp. 143-147.
87. Gupta, H.R. : Hostory of Sikh Gurus, U.C. Kapoor & Sons. Delhi, 1973, p. 92.
88. Ibid., p. 92.
89. Ibid., p. 93.
90. Ibid., p. 93.
91. Ibid., pp. 100-101.
92. Ibid., pp. 101-102.
93. Ibid., p. 104.
94. Gur Bilas Patshabi Chhevin, pp. 84-85.
95. Gupta, H.R.: op cit.. pp. 114-19 and Pothi Panj Sakhian.
96: Ibid.
was Ibid., p. 130.
98. Anonymous : Hagiqat-i-Bana-wa Uruj-i-Firgai-Sikhan, 1784 AD, pp. 3-6. The Sikh Review,
Calcutta, Feb. 1990, p. 22.
99. Gupta, H.R. : op. cit.. p. 177.
100. Ibid., p. 234.
101. Rattan S. Bhangoo: S7 Guru Panth Parkash, Ed. Jit Singh Sital, SGPC, Amritsar, p. 189.
102. =Guru Granth Sahib: p. 966.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
103. Macauliffe, M.A.: The Sikh Religion, Vol. V, p. 295.
104. Gupta, H.R. : op. cit., pp. 139-140.
105. Schumacher, E.F.: A Guide to the Perplexed, pp. 134-135.
106. Guru Granth Sahib, pp. 560, 1092.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
6
THE SIKH THOUGHT
KAPUR SINGH
The basic problems of Sikh thought are naturally the same as those of other world religions and, as
may be expected, their treatment by Sikhism is, in the main, on the lines of the Hindu and Buddhist
speculative thought. Wherever Sikhism differs or departs from these lines of thought, it does so, as a rule,
not by introducing new terms or concepts but by underlining an already familiar concept, or by amplifying or
interpreting it otherwise. This is, as it should be, for, thus alone is it possible to effect a new advance of
expansion in the cultural and religious horizon of mankind, and it is thus that all great cultures and
civilizations have emerged and developed.
THE UNIVERSE
In Sikh thought, the final duality between the Matter and Spirit is denied. The basic Sikh thought is
strictly monistic :
“From One the Many emanate, and finally into the One the Many submerge.”!
All that exists, whether in the form of phenomena and appearances, as Becoming, or as Numenon
and Reality, as Being, is, in fact, the Spirit and the Mind. The individual mind, the numerous forms of life
and the inanimate matter are all Spirit in different forms. Out of its own impulse and initiative of the Spirit a
process of involutions occurred for some limited purpose, the precise nature of which is beyond human
comprehension. All we can say is that such is its nature and such its pleasure. The fraction of the universe in
its initial form, which the modern theorists, such as Abbe Lamatre call, the Primaeval Atom, resulted
from the involutionary impulse of the Absolute Spirit, God. In this Primaeval Atom was originally
concentrated, in a super-dense state, that which expanded and disintegrated, through an antithetical
evolutionary impulse, for thousands of millions of years of the human mind, and finally into the universe as it
is today. This eruptive, fissionary impulse, whereby the Primaeval Atom has issued into the innumerable
forms constituting the universe, has reached its highest point, up-to-date, in the creation of man, and man,
therefore, is the point in creation from where the inverse movement of evolution may take a further leap
towards the Spirit. These two processes of involution and evolution, apasarpani and upasarpani as the
profound ancient Jaina thought speculated, constitute a double but simultaneous movement, and thus
creation of the universe is an involution-cum-evolution process, a descent and an ascent. The universe, thus,
is nothing but God-in-Becoming. “The Formless has become all the innumerable forms, Himself. He, that is
beyond the attributes, inheres. Nanak declares the doctrine of the One Absolute Being, that is Becoming, for,
the One indeed is the Many.’
The main doctrines of Sikh theology are grounded in this view of the Ultimate Reality and its nature.
GENESIS
With regard to the coming into being of the Primaeval Atom, the Sikh doctrine is that the process
was instantaneous, caused by the Will of God. “The forms become in consequence of the Divine Will.
Comprehension fails at this stage of understanding of the Divine Will.’
After thus stating this beginning of the Becoming, the further statements made in the Sikh scripture
about the creation and evolution of the universe, are remarkably akin to the picture which has now been
adumbrated by scientific speculation after considering the data revealed by the recent advances in
Observational Astronomy and probes into the heart of Matter. One of the basic hymns in the Sikh scripture,
which may be called, the Hymn of the Genesis, says :
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
“For millions upon millions, countless years was spread darkness,
When existed neither earth nor heaven,
But only the limitless Divine Ordinance.
Then existed neither day or night, nor sun or moon;
The Creator into unbroken trance was absorbed.
Existed then neither forms of creation, nor of speech;
Neither wind nor water;
Neither was creation, or disappearance or transmigration.
Then were not continents, nether regions, the seven seas,
Not rivers with water flowing.
Existed then neither heaven or the mortal world
ort the nether world.
Neither hell or heaven or time that destroys.”
“As it pleased Him, the world He created;
Without a supporting power the expanse He sustained.”
“None His extent knows.
Of this from the Master, perfectly endowed comes tealisation.’’4
MAN
Paul Tillich identifies man’s basic predicament as existential estrangement from his essential being,
estrangement which is expressed in anxiety about meaninglessness of life, gnawing awareness of alienation
and incurable lack of wholeness, as his existential dilemma: “my bedstead of anxiety, strung with strings
of pain and my cover quilt of alienation is my existential predicament. O, my God, take note of it and have
mercy upon me.”5
Paul Tillich, the modern Western man, was not aware that in the Sikh scripture, not only the human
predicament has been noted, but the way to its cure has also been pointed out : Let man take refuge in God
and proceed to cure his incurable sickness through identifying himself with God’s purposes; “How else can
man secure abiding peace and wholeness except through refuge in and communion with God P’”6
Man being the highest-yet point in the process of creation, where the evolutionary impulse has
apparently near-exhausted its initial momentum, it is man on whom now the responsibility rests for
consciously revitalising this impulse for a further evolutionary leap.
“Thou art the very essence of God. Therefore, know thyself as such.’”
“You have received this gift of the human body and it is from here that the further upward
movement towatds God-tealisation starts. Therefore, now make an all-out effort to reach the Goal and do
not waste human life in frivolities.’’8
It is the involution-cum-evolution which is responsible for the creation of the universe, and which
after reaching the point of human consciousness, has reached a stasis, and the man is thus a voluntary
diminution of the infinitude of God, for some obscure but limited purpose, as, indeed, all forms of existence,
represent a diminution of God. Since God is truth, knowledge, bliss, light, harmony and immortality, the
involuted forms of creation are so much less of all these. Man being the stage at which the evolution has
emerged into self-consciousness, man is capable of knowing that he has reached a particular stage of the
creative process, and he is capable, volitionally, of taking steps to evolve upwards to the next stage. This is
the stage of the brahmajnani, or the God-conscious man, and it is this notion of evolution, the premonition of
which finds expression in the later 18th and early 19th century West European literature in the form of the
concept of ‘the Superman.’ “Lo, I preach to you the Superman; Superman is the meaning of the earth,” said
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Nietzsche. Again, “Man is a rope stretched between the animal and the Superman ...... what is great in man,
is that he is a bridge, and not a goal.”? Sikhism agrees with this except, that Sikhism declares that ‘the
meaning of the earth’ reaches far beyond the stage of the Superman, and Superman is only an interim stage ‘a
bridge and not a goal.’ Sikhism endorses Neitzsche that the sphere of the activity of the Superman, and of
the higher-still goal of the evolution, is ‘the earth’, in the sense that it is on this earth that a perfect human
Society of God-conscious men, a psycho-social perfection, is the ultimate objective of the impulse of God,
which has originally given rise to the process of creation. In contradistinction to all those and previous
philosophies and religions, which taught that the ultimate goal of man was either absorption into God, or
entry into a supramundane Kingdom of God, wherein there is abiding propinquity to God, Sikhism urges
man to divinize the whole of humanity on this earth by transforming mind, life and matter, through a
conscious effort and will, and with the aid of the spiritual technique of the Namyoga, which is capable of
taking along the whole psyche of man to a level of existence, undreamed of before, where pure knowledge,
limitless harmony and divine bliss would prevail. This indeed would be a Society of god-like-beings, and the
ultimate purpose of the divine impulse of creation is the establishment of this Society of human deities in the
terrestrial spheres of the universe. It is the teaching of the Sikh Gurus that the supreme duty of man is to
make an all-out effort towards this divine goal, and the Sikh Gurus not only point out this goal, but also
reveal the way towards it. “Hail, the Guru, a hundred thousand times, hail, for, He reveals the secret of
transforming mankind into deities, and that, too, in an instant.’”!°
GOD
The Sikh concept of the Ultimate Reality is more akin to the Judaic notion of an Almighty Person
than to the Aryan concept of an immanent neutral Principle. The basic formula of Sikh dogma is the opening
line of the Sikh scripture which characterised the Ultimate Reality as follows :
“The One Becoming-Being. Truth. Numenon. Creator. Person. Without fear of another. Without
animosity towards another. Beyond Time. Form. Unborn. Self-expression. Light. Contacted by human
mind through (His) Grace.!
MAYA
The doctrine of maya has been basic to the Hindu and Buddhist speculations from the very
beginning. The best known work, apart from the omniscient, Mababharta, in which the term, ‘maya’ (relative
truth) is employed as a philosophical concept, is the metrical treatise, Karzka, by Gaudpad, where-in, unlike
the Mahabharta (Bhagwadgita XVIII. 61), the term is not taken for granted, but is explained and defined.
Since this name, Gaudpad, was borne by the teacher of the famous philosopher of Hindu monism, Samkara,
the author of the Karika may be the same person who might have lived at the end of the 7th century. This
work, Karka, is usually printed with the Mandukya-upanisad, and for practical purposes, is regarded a part of it.
In language and thought, both, it bears a remarkable resemblance to Buddhist writings of the Madhyamik
School, and the criticism of the Hindu orthodoxy that the monism of Samkara, in which the doctrine of maya
is embedded, is, in reality, crypto-Buddhism, is not without substance.!2 In the Karika, the world of
appearances is compared to the apparent circle of fire produced by a whirling lighted torch. This striking
image first occurs in the Maitrayana Upanisad (V1. 24). It also occurs in the Buddhist Mahayan scripture, the
Lankavtarsutra, which purports to be an account of the revelation of the true Religion of Gautama, the
Buddha, when he visited Ceylon and there gave discourses to the King of the island, Ravana, and his wife,
Mahamati. This represents a well matured phase of speculation in Buddhism, as it criticises the Hindu
schools of philosophy of the Samkhya, Paswpat, as well as other schools. It includes a prophecy about the
birth of Nagarjuna, the great Buddhist savant of the 4th century A.D., and it mentions the advent of Guptas
which marks the renaissance of Hinduism in India. It also alludes to the fresh incursions of the Hunas into
northern India, which incursions destroyed the Imperial Gupta dynasty at the end of the 5th century A.D.
Throughout the Hindu speculative and religious literature ever since, this doctrine of maya is admitted as in
some way an independent principle of the process and ontological structure of creation. True, the subtle
Samkara asserts that the principle of maya is aniravacani, that is, it can neither be said to exist nor not to exist.
A is neither A, nor not A. Whatever else this statement may mean, it does concede that maya has a positive
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
existence. Sikhism denies the doctrine of maya, thus conceived. As ignorance and nescience have no positive
existence, they merely being the aspects of the self-limited involuted Spirit, likewise, maya, as such, has no
positive existence. It is merely a way of saying that the individual consciousness perceives the Reality only in
the form of partial knowledge, which is there on account of involution. As the darkness is merely a negative
aspect of the light of the sun, similar is the case with ignorance and nescience.
“What is there positive to which we can give the name of maya ? What positive activity is the maya
capable of 2”
The human soul is subject to the pleasure and pain principle in its very nature, as long as it operates
on the individuated plane of consciousness.
Again, “Maya, in the form of a snake, entwines to render human mind immiscible with the real, and
the more it is accepted at its face value, the more it misguides. Rare indeed is such a man who overcomes
and casts it away.” Further, “what is maya except a befooling magic trick ? Yea, a dry blade of grass afire, a
passing shadow of a summer cloud, a momentary flooding after a tropical rain, for him who is out of
communion with God.’!3
What do these dissertations on maya, in the Sikh scripture mean ?
Maya is the antithesis of moksha in Hindu thought. But maya is not the antithesis of the Absolute
Reality. There is no incompatibility between the brabma and maya, for the former is not opposed to the Many.
It is advanda, non-dual, that is, it has no opposite being outside all classification. To be precise, ‘classification’
is exactly maya. Maya noun of Sanskrit is derived from the root marr, ‘to measure to form, to build, to lay out
a plan’, the same root from which Graeco-Latin words, ‘metre’ ‘matrix’, ‘material’ and ‘matter’ are obtained.
The fundamental process of measurement is division. Thus, the Sanskrit root, dva, from which we get
‘divide’, is also the Latin root of ‘dus’, and the English, ‘dual.’ To say, then, that the world of ‘facts’ and
‘events’ is maya is to say that the words, ‘facts’ and ‘events’ are terms of measurement rather than the real
itself, per se. ‘Measurement’ is setting up bounds of all kinds, whether by descriptive classification or by
screening. Thus, the ‘facts’ and ‘events’ are as abstract as lines of latitude or feet and inches, metres and
centimetres. This is not to be confused with the “Idealism” or “Monism” of the Western philosophy, for all
concrete things are not, in reality, illusion, unreal, or just, the One. They are not unreal and illusory, because
maya iS Not non-existence; it is a wrong mode of apprehension. It is not ‘One’, because ‘One’ is a thing, a
mode of measurement and, therefore, itself aya. To join the ‘many’ into ‘one’ is as much maya as to separate
the many from one. The world, as we perceive it, is made up of surfaces and lines, of areas of density and
vacuity, but the ‘”aya@ concept of the Sikh scripture says that these forms and appearances, these things and
events have no “own-being’’, svabhava; they do not exist in their own right, but only in relation to one another,
like “the spark of a dry blade of grass”, or like “the fleeting shadow of a summer cloud.” Concretisation and
formalisation is aya, when the human mind attempts to comprehend and control that which impinges upon
his consciousness. This is the unreal world of Buddhism, the world of ‘name and form’, nama-rupa. When
the Sikh scripture says that “aya is a snake which entwines human consciousness, and whosoever takes it at
its face value, him maya misleads and confuses”, it means that man confuses his measures with the world so
measured, of identifying money with wealth, fixed convention with fluid reality. The Sikh doctrine of maya
points out the impossibility of grasping the actual world in the verbal net of man’s mind and the fluid
character of those very constructions he thus artifacts. This world of maya escapes both the comprehension
of the philosopher and the grasp of the pleasure-seeker, like water from a clutching fist, “like the fleeting
shade of a summer cloud.”
This interpretation of the concept of maya in Sikh terminology has far-reaching consequences in so
far as it pulls the Hindu mind out of the slough of indolent introspective pre-occupation, and subjectivism,
generated by the belief that the whole world of the appearances in which man is born to pursue his socio-
political life, is no more real than a phantasmagoria in the minds of the gods above. By giving a foundation
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
of solid reality to the world of appearance, this re-interpretation of the concept of maya conforms to a sense
of reality, a feeling of urgency and an objectivity to the whole frame of mind of man, which is necessary for
the all-out effort to speed up the evolutionary process through the human will, and this is the core of the
precepts of Sikhism, as a way of life.
ETHICS
The fact that religious experience, per se, is non-moral, has been known to Hindu thought from the
very beginning. In the West, it has been recognised clearly only in recent times. It was Dr Otto who in his
Idea of the Holy, about a quarter of a century ago, made this point finally clear. In the Judaic religious tradition,
for all practical purposes, religious life and ethical conduct appear to have been made identical. The ten
Commandments of Moses are ethical precepts. In the Koran, it is these ethical commands which are
presented as the essence of religion. Western scholars are sometimes shocked at the stories narrated in the
ancient Hindu texts, of the conduct of gods that does not conform with strict ethical standards, and about
which the narrator of the story expresses no moral horror and passes no censorial judgement. From this, the
Western reader erroneously concludes that ethics has no place in the Hindu religious practice and tradition.
This is far from the truth. From the very beginning, it has been recognised that ethical conduct is the very
foundation on which the life of a religious man must be based. The rules of conduct of the Buddhist
sharamans, the formulary of conduct of Jain bhikshus, the daily rules regulating a Brahmin’s life, bear ample
testimony to the fact that the relation of ethics to religious experience is well recognised and established,
though a man with secular sovereign status is exempted from moral censure.!? This moral exemption,
however, is more a juridical rule rather than a moral precept. The case of non-human gods, though is
obviously on a different law. In Sikhism, while it is recognised that the religious experience belongs to a
category of values which has a unique status and ontological structure in its own right, it is, nevertheless,
insisted that without strictly ethical purity of conduct there is no possibility of any advance in the religious
experience. A religious life, not strictly grounded in ethical conduct, or a religious discipline which ignores
the ethical requirements, is considered as a highly damaging error. “The seed of the teachings of the Guru
cannot germinate except in the field of ethical conduct, constantly irrigated by the waters of truth.”!5 “A man
of religion is ever characterised by ethical deeds, honest living, sincerity of heart, and a fearless passion for
truth.”!6 “Nanak maketh this emphatic declaration, let all men ponder over it. Ethical conduct is the only
true foundation of human life on earth.”’!7 Sikhism, thus, lays a stress on morality which raises the moral law
to a higher and absolute status such as was not so in the Hindu and Buddhist thought.
The Buddhist and Brahminic systems appear to assume tacitly that morality is a means to felicity and
that it is not obedience to a law which exists in its own right as demanding obedience, what Immanual Kant
called, the Categorical Imperative. It is true that by them moral conduct is regarded as governed by the
cosmic law, called, the law of arma, which means that good deeds bring good results and evil deeds bring evil
results. “The evil deeds I did in past lives have now become impediments and misfortunes for me.”18
Sikhism, however, raises ethical conduct to a higher and more independent, absolute status, and makes it as
the true expression of the harmony of human personality with the Will of God. All ethical conduct,
therefore, is not merely conducive to good results such as happiness, but it is primarily, an act of
establishment of concord between the human personality and the Person of God. Since this concord is the
highest end and the goal of human existence and endeavour, it is, therefore, the basic ingredient of the
highest activity of man which is religion. Thus, Sikhism while recognising that the order of Reality which is
revealed as numenon to the human experience does not fall under the category of ethical experience, it
unequivocally emphasises that the two cannot be divorced or separated, and that the nature of the numenon
is such that its realisation is impossible without ethical conduct. The ethical category and the numenal
category ate distinct, but are structurally and inseparably joined.
In this way, the Sikh thought fuses the Hindu thought and the Semitic tradition on the subject of
ethics and religion.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
FREE WILL
European philosophy and theology have been much exercised on the subject of the ‘free will’, while
the Hindu tradition has considered this subject as of minor importance. The explanation for this lies in the
analytical understanding of the concept by both the traditions. In European thought, an individual is
conceived of as a permanent fixed entity, basically separate from the rest of the world which is his universe.
It is argued that without freedom of will there is no moral responsibility, there can neither be guilt nor
punishment, either in society or hereafter, before the throne of God. This problem has not much troubled
the Hindu thought which considers that there is no such thing as a completely free and stable entity, called,
‘the individual’, and secondly, the Hindu argues, that if the human will is not free then what does the term,
“freedom”, mean ? What instance shall we bring forth with which to contrast the supposed determination of
human will ? Our notion of “freedom” is inalienably derived from our own experience to which we give the
name of “will.” Whatever, therefore, we may mean by “freedom’’, it is ultimately in the terms of our own
‘will, that we give meaning to it. Thus interpreted, to say that human will is free, is an axiom, as well as a
tautology. There is no meaning in the thesis that human will is not free, for, “free” is that which is like unto
the human will. The trouble, however, arises when we give to the expression, “free will”, a meaning which
we have not derived from our experience of our ‘will’, but which have been superimposed by our intellect.
Thus, we like to think that, “free will” is that power of volition of the human individual which is totally
uncaused and unconditioned. The concept of ‘self-caused inevitability’ and ‘freely chosen determinism’
would appear as puzzling, if not altogether non-sensical to the Western mind. A little reflection, however,
will show that such a “freedom” does not, and cannot, in fact, exist, and further, that, if it did and could exist,
it will destroy all foundations of ‘moral responsibility’, ‘sense of guilt’, and justification for ‘punishment’ either
here or hereafter. To begin with, there are the facts of heredity, the environment, and the subconscious
mind. There is not much doubt that the individual is the product of his heredity, the inner mechanism of
which the science of biology has discovered recently in the fertilized germ-cells and its genes, which make all
the organic cells that make up the body including the brain and the nervous system. This pattern we inherit
from our patents and our ancestors and it is certainly a determination of the choices that we make in out lives
from time to time. Psychology has revealed to us that subconscious layers of human mind as the seat of
instincts, emotions, and intuitions, for those who faithfully follow the dogma of the Church Council of
Constantinople (553 A.D.) which anathematised the doctrine of transmigration, in the race during evolution
of millions of years; or, accumulated, for those who hold the doctrine of metempsychosis as fundamental,
accumulated in the course of untold numbers of previous births and rebirths of the individual. They are
certainly a determinant throughout a man’s life in the matter of his choice and the conduct that follows it.
Again, from outside, the social environment is active in continuously influencing and moulding the
individual’s mind, and thereby his power of choice and conduct. These three factors, the physical, the
environmental and the hereditary, are there as a fact, and their powers of influencing the human power of
choice cannot be denied. In this sense, there cannot be a ‘free will’, as an uncaused and unconditioned factor
which solely determines as to what choice, in a given situation, an individual will make. But, even if there
were such a “free” will, it will entail disastrous consequences. If a man’s actions are not free, when they can
be shown to be casually chained to his character, the sum total of his heredity, past experiences and
environment, then the only circumstances in which it would be proper to call a man “free”, would be those in
which he acted independently of his received character, that is, of his habits, desires, urges, and perspective
on life, and all the rest. But, if this agent of ‘free’ action, is not to be equated and identified with that which is
subject to particular desires and urges, which is circumscribed by a given environmental and circumstantial
set-up, which is devoid of character, motives, persistent interests and the like, then who is this agent of ‘free’
choice, the ‘he ? Such a notion of ‘free’ will completely dissolves the agent of action; a person with such a
‘free’ will is a completely disembodied and unidentifiable entity. Such an entity can neither be blamed nor
praised. Indeed, such an entity would be truly like the “Superman” of Nietzshe, “beyond good and evil.”
Nor can such an entity be held responsible for what it does, for, it would be clearly unreasonable to hold an
individual responsible for his actions, if we did not think there was a cause and effect connection between his
character and his conduct. When we can show that there is no such connection, as, for instance, an act is
committed as a result of coercion, we do not normally hold him responsible. The reason is not that the one
act is ‘uncaused’ and ‘free’, while the other is ‘determined.’ In one case, the cause lies in the character of the
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
individual over which he has, in some sense, control while in the other case, he has no such control. As we
gain new knowledge about the kinds of causes that affect conduct, we change our mind about the kinds of
behaviour for which we should hold men responsible. The recent shifts of stress in the science of Penology
in the modern world, and the ancient wisdom of the East and West, which iterated that an individual is
ultimately responsible for nothing, must be appreciated in the context of this analysis, and not in the
superfine frame of reference of ‘determinism’ and ‘free will.’ “A man reaps only what he sows in the field of
karma,?'” declares the Sikh scripture. It simultaneously says, that, “Say, what precisely is it that an individual
can do out of his free choice ? He acteth as God Willeth.”2° And the Bhagvadgita asserts that, “God sits in the
heart of every creature with the consequence that all revolve in their set courses, helplessly tied to the wheel
of maya.’*! That man is free to choose and act to some extent, and to the extent that he is so, to that extent
alone he is morally responsible and subject to praise and blame, is a true statement. That there is no such
entity, and no such entity is conceivable, which is wholly ‘uncaused’ and ‘undetermined’, and further that in
the ultimate analysis, the whole area of individuality can be linked to a cause of causes which are supra-
individual, is also a true statement, and these two true statements are not self-contradictory or incompatible
with each other, constitutes the Sikh doctrine on the subject.
This brings us back to our immediate experience that seems to carry its own certitude with it, that, in
some sense, we are ‘free’, for, we have the notion of ‘freedom’ as the core of this experience. Sikhism, while
implicitly taking note of the three factors which determine the powers of human choice, lays stress on this
fourth factor, perpetually present and operative in the human mind, which possesses the autonomous powet
of choice. This autonomous power is the divinity in man, according to Sikhism, and it is this core around
which the whole human personality is built. It is, at heart, “the source of all human misery, as well as the
panacea of all his ills.”?? “How may man demolish the wall of nescience that separates him from God ? By
being in tune with the Will of God. And how shall we know the Will of God. Nanak answers : It is
embedded in the very core of human personality.”% It is this autonomous power of free choice which is
given to every human personality, and by virtue of which the effects of the other three determining factors of
human choice are interfused, and, thus, the act of free human choice gives birth to a new event, which is not
wholly determined, and which is not a mere combination and aggregational consequence of all these four
factors, but which is a new event, unique in nature, and potently capable of giving rise to other similar events
in the future. It is this power of free choice that is included in man’s original heritage, which has the capacity
to go beyond this heritage, and thus, within the limits given, a human being is free to shape his own destiny.
Nor are the other three factors, his received character, the environment and the subconscious mind, merely
accidental and fortuitously superimposed upon the individual, for, they too are the fruits of his past karma of
uncounted previous births, and thus, they are self-determined, self-caused, result of free choices earlier made.
When and why and how did an individual make the first free but wrong choice ? This question relates to the
First Things, and, therefore, exhypothesis, the individual comprehension fails at this point : “the son observeth
and knoweth not the birth of his father.”24
KARMA
The doctrine of Aarma is not the same as the doctrine of pre-destination of the Christian theology.
Karma is, in a sense, fate, self-caused inevitability, not pre-destination, for, within the limits given, (and these
limits constitute the karma inherited from the previous births), a man is free. This karma is not ‘fate’, because
all the time we are making our own karma and determining the character of our further status and births. The
doctrine of karma as understood in higher Hinduism, and as expounded in Sikhism, merely teaches that our
present limitations are traceable to our acts of autonomous choice in our past lives, and as such, our Aarma is
a source of rewards and punishments which we must enjoy and endure, but this idea differs from the idea of
‘fate’, as commonly understood in European thought, in as much as it is not inexorable, for all the time we
are making our own karma within a context, the core of which is always free and autonomous.
EVIL
The existence of evil, it might be said, is the main reason for the keen interest in religion, and,
therefore, the explanation of evil is the chief problem of theologies and religious philosophies. Whether it
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
was God who created evil, and whether evil is due to misuse of the gifts of free will, are problems which
constantly occur and recur in almost all religions of the world. But, the presence of evil, as a de-tranquilliser
and disturber of the composure of the human mind, cannot be ignored or argued away, so much so that
perceptive minds regard it as the preponderant characteristic of the existential human situation.»
The main trend of Hindu thought on this problem is that since the world itself is unreal, the
existence of evil in it is not of greater concern to the individual than the world itself. He asserts that the
proper course for the human soul is to seek mui, liberation or unison with God by renouncing and
discarding this vain show of appearances, called, the world. The Hindu, thus, is not very much concerned to
prove that evil does not really exist in the world, or to explain why God allows it to exist. Since the world
itself is no more than a phantom and an insubstantial dream, the evil itself cannot be of a more enduring
substance, and, at any rate, it is of no direct concern to the man of religion.
Sikhism cannot and does not adopt this view, because Sikhism does not accept the ultimate
dichotomy of matter and spirit, and does not accept as an independent entity, the principle of illusion, maya.
Since Sikhism postulates that religious activity must be practised in the socio-political context of the world,
the problem of evil is very much a real problem to Sikhism as it is to the European thinker. Sikhism,
therefore, returns almost the same answer to the problem of evil which the European pantheist gives, namely,
that since God is all things and in all things, evil is only something which is a partial view of the whole,
something which appears as such, when not seen from the due perspective. Sikhism asserts that there is no
such thing as the independent principle of evil, as some theologies postulate, although there are things in this
world which are evil. This antithesis of evil and good, according to Sikhism, is a necessary characteristic of
the involution syndrome involved in the process of creation of the world. Evil and good appear at one stage
of this involution-cum-evolution and they disappear when the process of evolution culminates into the
unitive experience of God, just as the white ray of light splits into its variegated spectrum while passing
through a prism, and again gathers these multichromatic hues into its all-absorbing whiteness, when it
becomes itself again. In the final stage of things, “all evil transmutes itself into good, and all defeat into
victory.” When a complete perspective is granted to man by the Grace of God, all evil melts into its source
which is All-Good.”* There is no independent principle of evil in the universe because God is All-Good and,
“nothing that proceeds from Al-Good can be really evil, and there is naught, which proceeds from any other
source but God.”?7
But this Sikh metaphysical speculation on the ontological status of evil, does not supply a clear cut
answer to the problem of evil as man encounters it in his everyday experience and life.
Ours is a time of upheaval political, social, religious, and moral; our most urgent problem is to
forestall the catastrophe that menaces us, catastrophe of total destruction, and unprecedented unrest and
violence. The causes of the present troubles and future dangers can all be traced back to the lack of any
root-principles, generally agreed in philosophy, religion and politics. Everywhere, old class structures of
society have been undermined by the advent of democracy. European hegemony and overlordship in Asia
and Africa have yielded place to independence or partnership. In religion, the simple faith in the ancient
theologies, and in their sacred writings as the explanation of the universe and as the foundation and sanction
of morals, has been shaken by the impact of modern science. Civilisation has been disadjusted, and
confusion prevails. General consensus is that the present age is mostly concerned, not with the world of
ideas, but with the world of things, material things that we make and use, sell and buy. Though physical
sciences, technology and economics are of immense value to mankind, it is not anywhere in that world that
we may hope to find the solution to our problems, and that solution, whatever it might be, lies in the world
of ideas. Men’s actions are determined by their ideas and not vice versa, as fanatical Marxists fondly hope
and obstreperously assert. Right ideas are those that lead to good actions, and good actions are those that are
known to lead to welfare. Wrong ideas are those that lead to opposite results, suffering and disaster. Welfare
means everything worthwhile, material, intellectual, moral and spiritual welfare.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
To discover wherein welfare consists, and to find ways to attain it, constitute a continuous enquiry,
discussion, study, meditation and argument. Thus, the ancient problem of evil is reopened, and the
explanation of it that monotheistic theologies give, namely, to argue it away at the transcendental level,
appears unsatisfying : the two world-wars of our times, for instance. If God is omnipotent and benevolent,
why are there wats ? The answer that the ontological status of evil is negative and non-existent, or the answer
implicated in the Book of Job, constitute an impressive argument and a magnificient poem, respectively, but
in the face of the concrete evil, the latter appears a sterile philosophy and the former an evasion, but no
straight answer. In the case of a dualistic theology that concedes two real and positive opposing powers,
good and evil, it would appear that if God has created a maleficent power, the power of evil, of negation and
denial, then God is not all Benevolent, but if this power is co-equal and co-existent then God is not All-
powerful. The problem of evil may be a mere abstraction, but there are problems of evil everyday in tangible
and concrete situations, and they raise not merely the philosophical questions about the status and origin of
evil, but also what is the moral imperative for man, in dealing with evil situations, in day-to-day life.
Sikhism takes direct and full cognizance of this aspect of the problem. While it denies evil an
ultimate status in the structure of Reality, it squarely faces the concrete existence of evil in the day-to-day life
of man, as well as the agents of evil in human affairs.
“The cannibals say ritual prayers of Islam, and the assasins strut about as practising Hindus ...... All
concern for human decencies and respect for ethical conduct has disappeared and the evil rules supreme.”’*
Sikhism calls upon all men of moral perception and spiritual awakening to oppose the agents of evil,
the evil-doers and their aides singly, through appropriate organisation, to oppose relentlessly, till the end, till
this evil is destroyed or contained. The Light of God, that shone through the Sikh Prophets, to guide
mankind is unambiguous and uncompromising on this point : “O, God of Benedictions, this blessing above
all, we do ask of You: the will and tenacity to tread the path of good promoting actions and fearlessness in
opposition to the agent of evil”? “The Light of Sikhism is for the supreme purpose of urging men to
destroy and extirpate evil-doers.”3
But, since according to Sikh metaphysics, the evil is just a passing phase, a phenomenal occurrence,
neither there in the beginning nor there at the end, and, therefore, having no substance or real existence, why
should any man of understanding bother to oppose it or to destroy or contain it P
Sikhism answers this question. The ancient Hindu insight into the scientific laws governing character
formation, tells us that, “what a man does, what he attitudinises, that he becomes.’’3! To tolerate evil, to co-
exist with it, and not to confront it, is to accept and compromise with it. Such acceptance and compromise
are antivirtuous passivity and negative life style, and the destiny of ethical and spiritual negation is hell. A
negative personality is a naked personality. In the absence of a proper covering of virtue and merit, there is
no more frightful fate that can overtake man : “On its predestined march towards hell, a naked soul looks
truly frightful.”’%2
Jacob Boehme in his, S%gnatura Rerum, tells us, “What is evil to one thing, that is good to another.
Hell is evil to the angels, for they are not created thereunto, but it is good to the hellish creatures. So also
heaven is evil to the hellish creatures, for, it is their poison and death.”
Emmanuel Swedenborg (1688-1772) wrote in his, Heaven and Hell:
“No punishment is from the Lord, but from Evil itself; because Evil is so joined with its own
punishment that they cannot be separated.”
By co-existence and non-confrontation with evil things, man is utterly degraded from his essential
humanity, and becomes a hellish creature, and thus, his punishment is great.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
“Fall and rise, rawness and ripeness are known and seen hereafter in the next world.”*
NUMENON AND SAMSAR, OR THE REALITY AND APPEARANCE
Samsar is the principle of change, which determines the world of phenomena, and in Hindu thought
and in some other systems of metaphysics, it has been argued that on this account it is unreal. It is presumed
as axiomatic that the real must not be infected with change. The basic formula of Sikh dogma, with which
the Sikh scripture opens, is proceeded by the exegetic statement that “all change, all evolution, all that is
characterised by the time-process, is ultimately real.’’>+
The numenon, the order of Reality, which is revealed to the human mind through gnosis, therefore,
is not something which is fundamentally different and away from the phenomenon, altered in the gnosis is
not that what really is, but it is the mode of perception and the quality of prehension of the individual, which
is transformed, thus revealing the vision of the numenon. It is this very mundane and the material world and
the phenomena which is fresh and differently prehended and cognised by the human consciousness, a
consciousness that is enlarged and uplifted. Sikhism, therefore, is in agreement with the aphorism of the
great Buddhist philosopher, Budhagosa who declared, that, “yas-samsaras tan-nirvanam’’, that is, “the flux and
the Absolute are the same.” “This world of fleeting appearances that you see, is, in fact, the true face of God,
and as such, it is revealed to the consciousness of emancipated man.’”5
REFERENCES
1. Ikkas te hoio ananta, Nanak ikkas mahi samae jio. — Majh, p. 131.
2. Nirankari akar apu nirgun sargun ek, eRahiek bakhanano Nanak ek anek Gauri, Bavan akheri, p. 250.
3. “Hukmi hovan akar hukam na kahia jai.”, p. 1.
4, Guru Granth Sahib, pp. 1035-36.
5. Ibid., p. 1379.
6. “Har nah na miliai sajanai Rat paiay bisram?”, G.GS., p. 133.
7. “Man tu jotsarup hain apna mul pachhan.” — Asa di var, G.GS., p. 441.
8. “Bhai prapat manukha dehuria, gobind milan ki eho teri baria, saranjami lagu bhavajalu tarankai, janamu
birtha jat rangi mayakew.” — Asa di var, G.G.S., p.12.
9. Thus spake Zarathustra. 1. 4.
10. Bakhari gur apne diohari sadvar, jini manas te devite kie Rarat no lagi bar. — Var Asa, G.GS., p. 462.
11. “1. Onkar, Satu, Namu, Karta, Purukhu, Nirbhau, Nirvaira, Akal Murti, Ajuni Saibhang, Gur Prasadi.”
G.GS., p.1.
12. Mayavadam asachhastram, prachhannam bauddham. — Padam-purana.
13. “Maya kisnau akhiye ? kia maya karam kamai ? dukh sukh tha jio baddb hai haumai karam Ramai.”
G.GS., p. 67.
“Maya hoi nagani jagati rabi laptae, is ki seva jo Rare tisi hi ko phir khae, gurmukh koi garadu tini mali
dali laee pae.” G.G.S., p. 510.
“Mai maya chhal; trin ki agan, megh ki chhaya Gobind bhajan binu had ka jal?’ — G.GS., p. 717.
14. Samrath ko nahin dos gusain. — Tulsi, Ramcaritmanas.
15. Amal kar dharti bij sabdo Rar sace ki ab nit deha pani — Stitag, G.G.S., p. 24.
16. Sac karni sac taki rabit, sac hirdai sac mukhi kahit — Sukhmani, G.G.S., p. 283.
17. Bhanat Nanak bujhe ko bicari, isi jag mahi Rarni sari — Sorath, G.GS., p. 599.
18. Purva janamam kritam papam byadhi rupen pidatam : Sarvadarsan Samerah.
19. Jeha byai so lunai karma sandra khet — Baramaha, G.G.S., p.134.
20. Kahu Manukh te kia hoe ave ? jo tisi bhave soi Raraye. — Sukhmani, G.G.S., p. 277.
21. Ishvrah sarvbhutanam brideso Arjun, nishtoti, bhramayan, sarvabhutani yantrasudhani maya.
— XVUHL 61.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
22. Haumain diragh rog hai daru bhi is mahi. —NVar Asa, G.G.S., p. 466.
23. Ki saciara hoiai kiv kude tuttai pal? hukamvajai callana, Nanak tikhia nal. — Japu, G.G.S., p.1.
24. Pita ka janam kai janai put — Sakhmani, G.G.S., p. 284.
25. Therefore, since the world has still
Much good, but much less good than ills
And while the sun and the moon endure
Luck’s a chance but trouble is sure
T’d face it as a’wise man should,
And train for ill and not for good. — Houseman, A.E.
26. Guru Granth Sahib; p. 1302.
27. Isu te hoe su nabi bura, orai Rababu kinai kachhu kara. — Sukhmani, G.GS., p. 294.
28. Manas khane karahi nivaj churi vagayin
tin gal tag...... saram dharam ka beda dur,
Nanak kud rabiya bharpur. — Var Asa, G.GS., p. 471.
29. Deha siva bar mohi thai subh Rarman te Rababun
na taraon, na daraon, ari sio jab jae laraon. — Dasameranth
30. Eha kaj dhara ham janamam ...... dust sabhan kau mul ukparan. — \bid.
31. Yatha kari yatha cari tatha bhavati.
32. “Nanga dojak calia ta disai khara draona.” — Asa Vat, G.G.S., p. 471.
33. Kace pakai othe pai, Nanak gaia jape jae. — Japu.
34. Adi sacu, jugadi sacu, hai bhi sacu, Nanak, host bhi sacu. — Japu, G.G.S., p.1.
35. Ibu visu sansar tum dekhde ehu hari ka rup hat, harirup nadri aia. — Ramkali., G.GS., p. 922.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
7
THE SIKH WORLDVIEW
DALJEET SINGH
INTRODUCTION
In order to understand the Sikh worldview, it is necessary to answer a number of questions, namely,
(1) what is the spiritual experience of the Gurus about the Fundamental Reality ? (2) what are the logical
implications of that religious experience ? (3) how do these implications or ideas differ from those in other
religions ? (4) did those ideas govern the course of Sikh religion ? and (5) what future does the Sikh
worldview hold for man ? In answering these questions, we shall confine ourselves entirely to the bani in
Guru Granth Sahib and historically accepted facts about the lives of the Gurus. Many of the
misrepresentations about Sikhism arise from the failure of writers to understand Sikhism on the basis of its
thesis, or to define Sikhism in terms of doctrines in Guru Granth Sahib. Obviously, in this short paper, we
shall only give an outline of the Sikh worldview. We shall start with a definition of the Fundamental Reality
ot God in Sikhism.
GOD IN SIKHISM
The Reality or God has been profusely defined in Guru Granth Sahib. Guru Nanak calls Him “Karta
Purkh” or “Creator Person”, the world being His creation. Apart from being immanent in the world, He is
the Ocean of Virtues, ie., He is a God of Attributes. In defining the fundamental nature of God, the Guru
says, “Friends ask me what is the mark of the Lord. He is all Love, the rest He is Ineffable.”! Thus, the key
to understanding the Sikh worldview is that God is Love. And Love has four clear facets : It is dynamic; it is
the mother of all virtues and values; it is directive or has a will; and it is benevolent towards life in which He is
immanent; Le., it generates neither a dialectical movement, nor a class war, nor suicidal competition or
struggle.
COROLLARIES OF ‘GOD IS LOVE”
This spiritual experience leads to five corollaries. First, it 7pso facto gives status, meaning and reality to
the world and life, because Love and God’s Attributes can be expressed only in a becoming universe. For,
when God was all by Himself, the question of love and devotion did not arise. In unambiguous words, the
Gutu says, “True is He, and true is His creation.”’? Second, it clearly implies that the religious man has to lead
a life of creativity and activity. Consequently, a householdet’s life is accepted and monasticism is spurned.
Third, it gives spiritual sanction to the moral life of man, indicating thereby that it should be of the same
character as the loving nature of God. For, “Love, contentment, truth, humility and virtues enable the seed
of Naam (God) to sprout.” This clearly prescribes the methodology of deeds. Fourth, it unambiguously
points out the direction in which human effort should move, and the yardstick with which to measure human
conduct. This sets the goal for the seeker, or Godman. Fifth, it shows the gracious interest of God in human
affairs and activities. An important attribute of God is that He is ‘Gurw’ or Enlightener who gives both
knowledge and guidance, ie., spiritual experience is noetic. The Guru’s God being a God of Will, one feels
confident that one is working in line with His altruistic Will. For, God is perpetually creating and watching
the world with His Benevolent Eye. And, He rewards every effort to become divine.5 For that matter, it
gives man hope, strength and optimism.
IMPLICATION OF ‘GOD IS LOVE”
Here it is necessary to stress that the definition that God is Love, is extremely important for
determining the category of Sikh religion. For, all systems in which God is Love, are life-affirming, and there
is an integral combination between the spiritual life and the empirical life of man. And, as in the case of Abu
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Ben Adam, love of one’s fellowmen, is the primary and essential counterpart of the love of God. But, in life-
negating systems, there is a clear dichotomy between the empirical life and the spiritual life of man. And
Sanyasa, asceticism, monasticism, withdrawal from life, pacifism or ahimsa and celibacy are the normal modes
of the spiritual path. Sikhism, Judaism, Islam and Christianity belong to the first category. Jainism and most
other Indian systems belong to the second category.
In fact, differences in approach to life are due to the basic difference in the spiritual experience. In
the second category of systems like Vaisnavism and Vedanta, God has been defined as sat-chit-ananda (truth-
consciousness-bliss). This is far from being a dynamic concept. Stace has made a detailed survey of the
description various mystics give of the nature of their spiritual experience of the Ultimate Reality. They all
give blessedness, tranquility, holiness, unitary consciousness and ineffability as the nature of their spiritual
experience.© No mystic mentions love as the characteristic of that experience. The distinction is not
arbitrary, but real. Huxley says, “The Indians say, the thought and the thinker and the thing thought about
are one and then of the way in which this unowned experience becomes something belonging to me; then no
me any more and a kind of sat-chit-ananda at one moment without Aaruna or charity (how odd that the
Vedantists say nothing about love) ...... I had an inkling of both kinds of mrvana — the loveless being,
consciousness, bliss and the one with love, and, above all, sense that one can never love enough.’ He also
says, “Staying in this ecstatic consciousness and cutting oneself off from participation and commitment in the
rest of the world — this is perfectly expressed today in powerful slang, in the phrase ‘dropping out.’ It
completely denies the facts, it is morally wrong, and finally of course, absolutely catastrophic.” “Absolutely
Catastrophic.” Hence, the religious system laid down by the Gurus is radically different from the earlier
Indian systems.
CONSEQUENT DIFFERENCES WITH OTHER RELIGIOUS SYSTEMS OF INDIA
As it is, the Guru’s concept of God is quite different from the concept of many of the quietist
mystics, or from the Indian concept of sat-chit-ananda. We find that Guru Nanak’s system follows strictly his
spiritual experience and his view of the Attributes of God. And as a Godman, he seeks to follow the line of
expression of God’s attributes in the world of man. Consequently, in the empirical life, this concept has
important implications which stand emphasised in the bani and life of Guru Nanak. Hence, Guru Nanak’s
system and its growth are entirely different from his contemporary religious systems and their growth.
First, it means, as already pointed out, the reality of the world and the life-affirming character of
Sikhism. For, God is not only immanent in the world, He also expresses His Love and Attributes in the
empirical world, and casts a Benevolent Eye on His creation. But in Vedanta and other Indian systems, the
world is either mithya, an illusion, a misery, or a suffering. Second, Sikhism being life-affirming, this,
inevitably, involves an integral combination between the spiritual life and the empirical life of man. This
constitutes the foundation of the ri-piri doctrine laid down by Guru Nanak in his bani. In other words,
Guru Nanak’s system is a whole-life system like Islam and Judaism, which also combine the spiritual and the
empirical lives of man. Third, in consequence of it, monasticism, samyasa, asceticism, pacifism and withdrawal
from life are rejected, and a householder’s life is accepted as the forum of spiritual activities and growth.
Logically, monasticism and celibacy go together, and Guru Nanak categorically rejected both of them.
Obviously, God’s qualities of being ‘Shelter to the shelterless’, ‘Milk to the child’, ‘Riches to the poor’, and
‘Eyes to the blind’,? can be expressed by the Godman only by being a householder and participating in all
walks of life, and not by withdrawing from them. The fourth difference follows as a corollary to this and to
the rejection of celibacy, namely, equality between man and woman.
In contrast, we find that in life-negating systems, and more especially in the Indian systems, the
position on all these four points is essentially different. For them, life is far from real or an arena of spiritual
endeavours. The spiritual path and the worldly path are considered separate and distinct. Whether it is
Vedanta, Jainism, Buddhism, Vaisnavism or Nathism, asceticism, monasticism, ahimsa, sanyasa ot withdrawal
from life into bhikshubood is the normal course. In consequence, celibacy is the rule, and woman is deemed to
be a temptress. Dighambra Jains believe that a woman cannot reach aivalya (spiritual summit), and has first
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
to achieve male incarnation.!0 In Buddhism, woman bhikshus are deemed second grade compared to male
bhikshus who ate considered senior to them.!! A male béikshu is not supposed to touch and rescue a drowning
woman, even if she were his mother.!? Sankara calls woman ‘the gateway to hell. Both Ramanuja and
Shankaradeva (a liberal Vaisnava saint) would not admit a woman to be a Vaisnava.'+ The latter stated, “Of
all the terrible aspirations of the world, woman is the ugliest. A slight side glance of hers captivates even the
hearts of celebrated sages. Her sight destroys prayer, penance and meditation. Knowing this, the wise keep
away from the company of woman.” Bhagat Kabir, we know, is considered a misogynist and calls woman
‘black cobra’, ‘pit of hell’ and ‘the refuse of the world.’® It is well-known that even today in Catholic
Christianity, a woman is not ordained as a priest. Against this, Guru Nanak not only sanctioned a
householder’s life but stated as to, “How can a woman be called impure, when without woman there would
be none.”’!”
All this has been explained to stress that the basic perceptions about the nature of the spiritual
experience and the ontological Reality being different, the spiritual paths, under the two categories of systems,
become automatically divergent.
Further, the acceptance of a householder’s life has important empirical and socio-political
implications. Except for Guru Harkrishan, who died at an early age, every Guru married and led a
householder’s life. By way of demonstration, this step was essential, otherwise, the entire Indian tradition
being different, Guru Nanak’s system would have been completely misunderstood and misinterpreted. We
are well aware that it is the Naths who questioned Guru Nanak as to how incongruous it was that he was,
wearing the clothes of a householder, and at the same time claiming to follow the religious path. Guru
Nanak’s reply was equally cryptic and categoric, when he said that the Naths did not know even the
elementaries of the spiritual path.'® For this very reason, the Guru did not make his son, Baba Sri Chand, a
recluse, his successor.
Regarding the fifth important difference about the goal of life of the religious man, Guru Nanak has
made the position very clear in his Japuji. After putting a specific question as to what is the way to be a
Sachiara of a true man, the Guru, while clearly rejecting the method of observing silence, coupled with
continuous concentration or meditation, replies that the right method and goal are to carry out the Will of
God.!? And, God being Love and the Ocean of Virtues, His Will is Altruistically Creative and Dynamic. The
Sikh goal of life is, thus, to be active and live a creative life of love and virtues. The goal is not personal
salvation, or merger in Brahman, but an ever active life of love. It is in this context that Guru Nanak gives
the call, “If you want to play the game of love, then come to my path with your head on your palm; once you
set your foot on this way, then find not a way out and be prepared to lay down your head.’’° For him, life is
a game of love. It is significant that the same advice was given by Guru Arjun to Bhai Manjh who was then a
Sakhi Sarvarya and wanted to be a Sikh of the Guru, “You may go on with the easy path of Sakhi Sarvar
worship, because Sikhism is a very difficult path, and unless you are willing to be dispossessed of your wealth
and to sacrifice your very life, it is no use coming to me.”*!_ Exactly, the same call for total commitment and
sacrifice was given by Guru Gobind Singh on the Baisakhi Day, 1699, when he created the Khalsa and
administered amrit to the Panj Piaras.
The goal being different, the sixth implication is as to the method to achieve that goal. In Sikhism,
the emphasis is on the methodology of deeds. Guru Nanak has made this point very clear when he says in
Japuji : “Man’s assessment in His court is done on the basis of one’s deeds”,”? and “It is by one’s deeds that
we become neat or away from God.” In order to stress the fundamental spiritual importance of deeds,
Guru Nanak says, “Everything is lower than Truth, but higher still is truthful living.”’?4 In fact, when the
Guru defines the gurmukh or the superman, he calls him : ‘One who always lives truthfully.”
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
ESSENTIALS OF SIKH LIFE AND ITS DIFFERENCES WITH OTHER SYSTEMS IN
MATTERS OF SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
The basic difference between a whole-life system and a dichotomous system is that in the former,
every field of life of operation of God, is also the field of operation and responsibility of both the Godman
and the seeker. This is the broad approach. Having defined the nature of God and the goal of man, the
important issue is what are the essentials of the religious life. In the context explained above, Guru Nanak
has fixed specific duties and responsibilities of the religious life. The first is of accepting equality between
man and woman. Guru Nanak clearly states, “Why downgtade woman, when without woman there would be
none”’,?> and “It is she who gives birth to great persons.”26 When the Third Guru created manjis or districts
of religious administration, women were appointed in charge of some of them.?” The second responsibility is
of maintaining equality between man and man. This was a direct blow to the social ideology of Varn Ashram
Dharma which gave scriptural sanction to the hierarchical caste system. Guru Nanak found fault with that
ideology saying, “The Vedas make a wrong distinction of caste”,?8 and “One cannot be a Yogi by mere
wishing, real Yoga lies in treating all alike.” He demonstrated the primary importance of treating all as equal
by taking, after his enlightenment, Mardana, a low caste Muslim, as his life companion. This meant a total
departure from the then existing religious prejudices, not only against lower castes, but also against Muslims
who were regarded as malechhas. He made it clear that any one wanting to join his society, had, at the very
start, to shed all prejudices against inter-religious or inter-caste dining and social intercourse. The
revolutionary character of this step could be gauged from the fact that a Ramanuja would throw the entire
food as polluted, if any one cast a glance on it while he had been preparing or eating it.*?
The third social responsibility, Guru Nanak emphasises, is the importance of work. This too, we
find, was something opposed to the then prevalent religious practice. Evidently, other-worldliness, sanyasa
and monasticism excluded the religious necessity of work and sustaining the society. In fact, the Naths who
were then the principal religious organisation in Punjab took a vow never to engage themselves in any work
or business.*!_ But Guru Nanak says, “The person incapable of earning his living gets his ears split (Le., turns
a Nath Yogi) and becomes a mendicant. He calls himself a Guru or saint. Do not look up to him, nor touch
his feet. He knows the way who earns his living and shares his earnings with others.”32 The Guru deprecates
the Yogi who gives up the world, and then is not ashamed of begging at the door of the householders. The
fourth social responsibility Guru Nanak stresses is about the sharing of wealth. He states, “God’s bounty
belongs to all, but men grab it for themselves.”34+ “Man gathers riches by making others miserable.’’
“Wealth cannot be gathered without sin, but it does not keep one’s company after death.’ All this clearly
condemns exploitative collection of wealth. The story of Guru Nanak rejecting the invitation of Malik
Bhago, a rich person exploiting the poor, but accepting the hospitality of Lalo, a poor labourer, illustrates the
same point as stressed in his bani.
Thus, the twin ideas about the brotherhood of man and the sharing of wealth to eliminate poverty
and maintain equality in society are stressed by Guru Nanak. Even after his missionary tours, Guru Nanak
took to the role of a peasant for the last 18 years of his life. It is significant that till the time of the Sixth
Guru, when social and military duties of the leadership and organisation of the Sikh society became quite
heavy and absorbing, every Sikh Guru had been doing a vocation or business to support his family.
The fifth social responsibility, where Guru Nanak radically departed from all the contemporary
religious systems, including Sufism, Santism and Christianity, was his approach towards injustice and
oppression of all kinds in society. He made a meticulous study of injustice and corruption, aggression and
incongruity in every field of life. He pointed out the greed and hypocrisy of Brahmin priests and Mullahs, the
‘blood thirsty corruption’ and injustice by lower and higher-rung officials in the administration, the misrule,
oppression and irresponsibility of the local rulers, their inability to give security, fairplay and peace to the
people, and brutal and barbaric butchery of the people. All this was not just idle rhetoric, but a diagnostic
assessment of the prevailing turmoil and conditions in the society, which the Guru felt, needed to be changed.
It needs to be emphasised that in Guru Nanak’s ideology, there was nothing like private or personal salvation.
Just as God of Love is benevolently looking after the entire world, in the same way, the Godman’s sphere of
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
activity and responsibility is equally wide, and is unhedged by any self-created barriers. This is, as we shall see,
a fundamental difference between a salvation religion catering for individuals, and a universal religion catering
for the spiritual well-being of society as a whole.
Here it is very relevant to give, as recorded by Bertrand Russell, the contrasted approach of St.
Augustine, one of the greatest exponents of the Christian gospel and author of C7ty of God. Russell concludes
: “Tt is strange that the last men of intellectual eminence before the dark ages were concerned, not with saving
civilization or expelling the barbarians or reforming the abuses of the administration, but with preaching the
merit of virginity and the damnation of unbaptized infants. Seeing that these were the preoccupations that
the Church handed on to the converted barbarians, it is no wonder that the succeeding age surpassed almost
all other fully historical periods in cruelty and superstition.”*’ Whereas Guru Nanak meticulously points out
every dark spot in the religious and socio-political life of his times, St. Augustine is simply unconcerned with
socio-political conditions of his period. For, “Augustine’s Czy of God (426) attacked both Christians who
expected the world to get better and pagans with a cyclic view of history. Augustine did not believe that the
spread of Christianity would ensure political and economic improvement. The earthly city of self-will would
continue to exist amidst the rise and fall of states and empires.’”*
Another important fact is Guru Nanak’s criticism in Babar Vani of the brutalities and massacres
perpetrated and misery caused by the invaders. He condemns them in the strongest terms and complains to
God for allowing the weak to be trampled upon by the strong.*? This hymn has an extremely important
lesson, which many of us have missed. For, anything which is within the sphere of His creation and the
responsibility of God, is certainly within the sphere of responsibility of the Godman. The hymn has four
implications; first, that injustice and oppression are violative of the Order of God; second, that as the Master
and God of Love, harmony has to be maintained by His Will; third, that, as the instrument of God, it is the
spiritual duty and responsibility of the Godman to confront all kinds of injustice; and, fourth, that, as such,
resistance to oppression was a task and a target laid down by the Guru for the religious society he was
organising. Because, it is Guru Nanak who defines God as ‘Destroyer of the evil-doers’,# “Destroyer of
demoniacal persons’,#! ‘Slayer of the inimical’,4? and ‘Protector of the weak.’ Such being the God of Guru
Nanak, it is equally the responsibility of the Godman, gurmukh, or the Sikh to carry out His Will which is just
and altruistic.
In short, in Guru Nanak’s system to ensure equality and fair play and to react against injustice and
ageression, become the religious duty and responsibility of the Sikh. Since the dawn of civilisation, the
greatest oppression and injustice have undeniably been done by the rulers, the State, or the Establishment
who have possessed all the instruments of power and coercion. It is impossible for idividuals to confront
such power. This leads to two important inferences. First, that in a whole-life system like Sikhism, which
combines spiritual life with the empirical life of man and accepts the mir7-piri doctrine, the religious man must,
as a religious duty, resist and confront injustice, wherever it takes place. Second, that such a religious man
should not only be cognizant of such injustice, but also organise a society that should be in a position to face
the challenge of such injustice and oppression. This follows logically both from Guru Nanak’s bani and his
system. This also explains why from the very beginning of his mission, he started organising the Sikh
societies at places which he visited and how the societies were logically linked and developed by his
successors into the Panth. These aspects are very significant and important about his society and religion. It
is obvious to every student of the Adi Granth that so far as the ideology is concerned, it had been completely
laid down in the bani of Guru Nanak. But what was lacking was the presence of a properly motivated and
responsible society that should be in a position to successfully discharge the responsibility of reacting against
injustice and oppression prevalent in his times.
There is another important and related issue. Having cast on his society the responsibility of
confronting injustice, again it is Guru Nanak who eliminates the hurdle of ahimsa or pacificism that stood as a
bar against the religious man or a religious society trying to confront socio-political aggression. Among
Vaisnavas, Jains, Buddhist Bhikshus, Naths, or Radical Sants like Kabir, abimsa is deemed to be a cardinal
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
virtue and meat eating is a prohibition. These religious persons are all from life-negating systems, with
personal salvation as the ideal. But a society that has to accept the social responsibility of confronting
injustice cannot remain wedded to the hurdle of ahimsa. For, reason and force are both neutral tools that can
be used both for good and evil, for construction and destruction. That is why Guru Nanak says, “Men
discriminate not and quarrel over meat eating, they do not know what is flesh and what is non-flesh, or in
what lies sin and what is not sin’’,4> and that “there is life in every grain of food we eat.”’4
ROLE OF LATER NINE GURUS
In a country, which for over 2,000 years had been trained in religious systems involving clear
dichotomy between spiritual and empirical life, and which had accepted ahimsa as a fundamental value and
individual salvation as an ideal, it was no easy task to create a mature society with the new motivation of
religious responsibility of always fighting injustice and oppression in all spheres of life.
It is very significant that Guru Nanak laid the foundations of every institution that was later
developed and matured by his successors. By starting the institution of /amgar (common kitchen) and taking
Mardana as his life companion, he gave a heavy blow to the divisive institution of Varn Ashram Dharma,
pollution and caste. He created a separate Sikh society with their own dharmasalas as centres of religious
worship and training. He sanctified the role of the householder as the medium of religious expression and
progress, and made it plain that work was a necessity of life, and idleness a vice. He emphatically made it
clear that to fight injustice and oppression is an essential duty of the religious man and the religious society.
For that end, while he created a new society with a new ideology, he also removed the hurdle of ahimsa, so
that his society could discharge its socio-religious responsibility without any unwanted inhibitions and
impediments in its path. And since the new society had not yet been fully organised and developed, and had
yet to be properly oriented to enable it to discharge its responsibilities, he also created the institution of
succession. It is very significant of the social and societal aims of Guru Nanak that after passing the
succession to Guru Angad, when he found him to be living a somewhat solitary life, he reminded him that he
had to be active since he had to organise a society or Panth.©
In the time of the Second, Third and Fourth Guru, four important steps were taken. Through the
creation of 22 manjis or districts of religious administration, the Sikh society was organised into a separate
religious Panth. But, the most important and difficult part of the task was the creation of new motivations
and the acceptance of the new life-affirming religious ideals of Guru Nanak. For, these were radically new in
their approach, implications and goals. The stupendous nature of the task of the Gurus can be judged from
the fact that even today great Hindus, like Jadunath Sarkar, Rabindra Nath Tagore and Mahatma Gandhi, and
Christians like McLeod, Cole, Toynbee and the like, all coming from pacifist traditions and conditioned by
them, find it difficult to understand the spiritual role of the Sixth and the Tenth Master.
The Third Guru created new institutions which had the dual purpose of weaning the Sikhs away
from the old Hindu society and of conditioning them in new values, ideals and practices. For example, while
Guru Nanak had bypassed his recluse son, Sri Chand, for the same reasons, the Second and the Third Guru
avoided persons of ascetic tendencies from entering the Sikh fold. The institution of /amgar, with the dual
putpose of feeding the poor and of eliminating the caste and status prejudices and distinctions, was
strengthened. Finally, the important religious centre of Darbar Sahib and the town of Amritsar were founded
and developed for the periodical meetings of the Sikh society and visits of the Sikhs to the Guru. The object
of all this was to establish a separate historical identity of the Sikhs and to wean them away from the
traditional society, its centres of pilgrimage, and its religious practices and rituals. Not only had they to be
trained in the essentials of a new religious system, but they had to be taken out of the strangle-hold of the
Brahmin priests claiming to be the sole medium of religious growth, practice and interpretation.
Then came the stage of the Fifth Guru who created and installed the Sikh Scripture as the revealed
and final doctrinal authority. The system of daswandh (giving 10% of one’s earnings for the cause of the
community) was organised. Sikhs were initiated into trading in horses, so that the transition to the next stage
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
of militancy could become smooth. As the instrument of God on earth, the Sikhs called their Guru, “True
Emperor.’ In the time of the Fifth Guru, the Sikh society had become ‘a State within a State’,#6 and had
developed a social identity which had caught the eye of the Emperor, who considered it an unwanted socio-
political growth. By his martyrdom, the Guru not only strengthened the faith and determination of the
community, but also sought confrontation with the Empire, leaving instructions to his son to begin
militarisation of the Sikhs. In the process, the Sixth Guru even recruited mercenaries to train his people.
This phase of martyrdom and confrontation with the Empire was continued by the subsequent Gurus till
Guru Gobind Singh did, as recorded by his contemporary Kavi Sainapat, the epitomic work of starting the
institutions of amrit and the Khalsa.*’ Having felt that the Panth had become mature and responsible enough,
the Guru created the Khalsa in 1699, and requested the Panj Piaras to baptise him.‘* It is significant that at
that time all the Guru’s sons were alive, meaning thereby that Guru Nanak’s mission had been completed and
thereafter the succession was not to be continued. And, finally, the Guru made Guru Granth Sahib the
Everlasting Guru of the Sikhs.“
Let us have a rapid look back to find out if the five tasks indicated by Guru Nanak had been
accomplished. First, the Sikhs had been formed into a distinct new religious society with a Scripture of its
own, being the full repository and complete and final guide of the Sikh ideology and its way of life. This
separateness was made total by Guru Gobind Singh’s Nash doctrine of five freedoms — Dharam Nash,
Bharam Nash, Kul Nash, Karam Nash and Kirt Nash° ‘This means freedom from the bonds of old religions and
traditions, of earlier superstitions and prejudices, of earlier acts and of restrictions in choice of trade or calling,
ot in professional mobility. The Tenth Master made a complete break with the earlier traditions and societies.
Second, it was a society of householders, rejecting all kinds of otherworldliness, idleness and monasticism.
Third, it was a casteless society with complete fraternity among its members. Men from the lowest and Sudra
castes rose to be its leaders. The contrast is evident from the fact that while the Sikhs have never had
Brahmin leaders, in India after Independence in 1947, the Prime Minister and practically every Chief Minister
was a Brahmin. Four, it was a society which was fully earthaware; and habits of work, production and service
became ingrained among its members. Begging was considered a disgrace in its social ethos. The fifth social
responsibility discharged by the Sikhs was to free the country from the curse of a thousand-year wave of
invaders from the North-West. Though the Sikhs were subjected over the years to the worst persecution in
Indian history, yet they suffered it and emerged triumphant. And, finally, they were able once and for all to
stem that tide. They have been trained to react against wrong, injustice and oppression. A society has been
created with the ideal of a Sant-Sipahi (Saint-Soldier).
MANMUKH TO GURMUEH : THE GURU’S CONCEPT OF EVOLUTION OF MAN
Here, it is necessary to state the manmukh-gurmukh concept, which is essential for understanding the
Sikh worldview. As the Gurus say, over millions of years life has evolved into man from a tiny speck of life.
The Gutu says, “For several births (you) were a mere worm, for several births, an insect, for several births a
fish and an antelope’, “After ages you have the glory of being a man.’’>! “After passing through myriads of
species, one is blest with the human form.”>? “God created you out of a drop of water and breathed life in
you. He endowed you with the light of reason, discrimination and wisdom.” “O man, you are supreme in
God’s creation; now is your opportunity, you may fulfil or not fulfil your destiny.”5+ At its present stage of
development, man is, without doubt, better equipped than other animals, in so far as he has a higher sense of
discrimination. But, as an ego-conscious being, he is still an animal, being a manmukh. This implies that
whatever be human pretensions, man is basically and organically a self-centred being. His psyche is governed
by an egoistic consciousness, that being his centre of awareness, control and propulsion. Because of his
present inherent limitations of ego-consciousness, it is vittually impossible for man to avoid conflict,
ageression, and wars. But the Gurus clearly hold out hope for man. There are four stages of evolution or
development. The Guru says, “God created first, Himself, then hawmain, third, maya (multifarious things and
beings) and fourth, the next higher stage of the gunmukh who lives truthfully.”5> The Gurus clearly say that it
is human destiny to reach the fourth stage and to meet God, or to be a gurmukh, or one who is in tune with
the fundamental Reality or Universal Consciousness, God, Naam, or Love. His ideal is not merger in God or
salvation, or union as an end in itself. Being the instrument of, or in touch with God’s Altruistic
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Consciousness, he is spontaneously benevolent, compassionate, creative and loving. It is very important to
note that the gurmukh or superman is not a quietist , he ‘lives truthfully.’ He lives as did the ten Gurus. For,
Guru Nanak was called just a gurmukh. This is the next higher stage of evolution towards which life is striving
and not towards darkness and death as materialist scientists would have us believe. Nor does Sikhism accept
any concept of the basic sinfulness or fall of man from grace. It only indicates the constitutional weakness,
immaturity or imperfection of man at his present stage of the evolutionary process or development. Hence, it
gives us an ideology of optimism and hope, invoking and exhorting us to make moral effort.
SURVEY OF HIGHER RELIGIONS
Before we draw our conclusions, let us make a brief survey of some religious ideologies of the world
and find the place of Sikhism among them. There are four clear religious ideologies that are current today.
DICHOTOMOUS RELIGIONS
First is the category of religious systems like Buddhism, Jainism, Nathism, Vaisnavism and Vedanta,
in which there is clear dichotomy between the spiritual life and the empirical life. Monasticism, sanyasa,
otherworldliness, celibacy, yogic meditation and ahbimsa are the common but important features of this
category. They hold out no hope for man, except by withdrawal from life and yogic or one-point meditation.
In each case, it is a path of personal salvation without any involvement in the socio-political affairs of man.
Practically, all the Indian religions, except Sikhism, belong to this category.
JUDAISM
Second is Judaism which has a long and chequered history. Basically, it is a system in which there is
no dichotomy between the religious life and the empirical life of man. Prophet Moses who got the revelation,
was both a religious and political leader. His Torah or Commandments and Laws prescribe and govern the
entire gamut of the spiritual and temporal life of the Jews. It is a system that prescribes rules governing the
conduct of prayer, rituals, sacrifices and their socio-political life. The renowned Hillel when asked to explain
the 613 commandments of the Torah, replied, “Whatever is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbour.
That is the entire Torah. The rest is commentary, go and learn it.’’5° In short, it is basically a life-affirming
system. It makes no distinction between the spiritual and the socio-political life of man. The Torah governs
every aspect of it. As to the means of resistance, Judaism recommends the use of force by saying, “Eye for
an eye, tooth for a tooth”, and indicates rules for a righteous fight.5’7 But, over its long history including the
period of the prophets, this aspect of its principle has, to an extent, been altered, or changed at least by some
sects of the community. At the time of the Babylonian attack (Sixth Century B.C.) on Palestine, Prophet
Jeremiah strongly recommended non-resistance or pacificism. He asserted that the attack was God’s
punishment to the Jews for their non-observance of His Laws.>* His assertion was something like Mahatma
Gandhi’s statement that the Bihar earthquake was a punishment to the Hindus for their practice of
untouchability. However, over the centuries thereafter, many religious sects of Jews like Essenes, Kabbalists,
Hasidists, Therapeutics,*° and even some Pharisees accepted the principle of non-tesistance, pacificism,
withdrawal and otherworldliness. Even monastic and celibate cults appeared among Jews, discarding both
the world and the use of force. This important change, in a basic religious principle, we believe, came about
in this religion in later parts of its history, when Judaism was unable to cope with challenges from the socio-
political environment, and their religious fervour had been exhausted. Practically, all these otherworldly sects
appeared after the destruction of the First Temple and the fall of Jerusalem, when thousands of Jews were
driven out as exiles and slaves to Babylonia. We wish to stress that these fundamental changes in Judaic
ideology, including otherworldly or monastic sects, appeared only during the lean period of Jewish history.
This happened about eight centuries after the revelation of Moses, and after the heydays of Jewish life in the
times of David and Solomon. But, it is very significant that despite the presence of somewhat pacifist ot
otherworldly cults and sects in Judaism, and despite about 2500 years of suffering and travail, the idea of
Zionism, a virtual revival of earlier non-pacifist ideals, strongly reappeared in Judaism in the last century. And
it is an important fact that Einstein, who says that his life was spent ‘between politics and equations’ was a
staunch Zionist. So much so, that when Israel was formed he was offered its presidency.* However, apart
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
from this apparent doctrinal ambivalence in its ideology, Judaism is a highly exclusive religion, not quite
universal in its character, affinities and approach.
CHRISTIANITY
The Judaic heritage of Christianity is undoubted. As in Judaism, in Christianity, too, there is, in
principle, no dichotomy between the spiritual life and the empirical life of man. For, Christ emphasises both
loving God with all one’s heart, and loving one’s neighbour as oneself.°! But like Buddha, he also emphasises
the pacifist principles, ‘resist not evil’ and ‘turn the left cheek if hit on the right.’ Religious history
demonstrates that pacifist religions almost invariably become otherworldly, even if they were life-affirming in
the beginning. Because of their religious pacificism, the Christians declined to take up service in the Roman
army. In fact, historians like Gibbon and Sir James Frazer have mentioned Christian otherworldliness as one
of the major causes of the fall of the Roman Empire.© It is obvious that Christianity, which, like Judaism,
was a religion of householders, showed, by the beginning of the 4th century A.D., clear monastic trends.%
Increasingly, monasteries and nunneries appeared as a significant development in the Christian religion. This
life of monasticism, asceticism and nunneries led, on the one hand, to otherworldly quietist mysticism, and,
on the other hand, to corruption and malpractices in the Catholic Church.
Consequent to this schism in the life of the Christian Church, ultimately arose the Reformation,
causing a major blow to the supremacy of the Church and its role as the guiding moral force in the life of the
Christian society. Lutheran and Calvinist reforms not only shattered the universal character of the Church,
but also brought about its subordination to the national State. In addition, because of Luther’s leanings
towards the feudal princes, he took a very hostile and feudalistic stand against the rights of the peasantry.
This landslide in the fortunes of the Church caused its gradual waning as a major moral influence in the
socio-political life of the Christian societies. After the rise of science, which was considered to be the new
elixir, it came to be believed that it would, in course of time, cure most human ills. The net result is that in
the last 300 years, Renaissance, scientism, empiricism and secularism have virtually eliminated religion from
the moral life of man in the West.
Toynbee says, “This transfer of allegiance from the Western Christian Church to the parochial
Western secular state was given a positive form borrowed from the Graeco-Roman civilization by the
Renaissance.” “This unavowed worship of parochial states was by far the most prevalent religion in the
Christian society.” Since the loss of supremacy of religion in the Christian society, Western life has lost its
moral moorings. Nationalism, communism and individualism have been the unstable offsprings of this
broken home. “Together with Darwinism, secularism and positivism, they have dehumanised the Western
culture, reducing liberalism to a self-serving, highly competetive individualism.” By relegating religion to the
background and having lost the moral springs of the Western culture, either utilitarian ethics has been
accepted as an expedient substitute or a reductionist search has been made to find appropriate ethical
elements in the life of the animals, or in the material base of man which is considered to be its fundamental
constituent. And this search has finally come to the dismal conclusion that all ethical life is ‘a defence
mechanism’ or a ‘reaction formation’ to the impacts of the environment. After the Second World War, a
third of the population of the world was living under the Communist system. As the century is closing, these
countries find that despite the myth of dialectical movement and synthesis, the system has been unable to
make any synthetic values or devise a system of ethics which is able to maintain cohesion within these
societies. And it is the existence of this moral vacuum that made the Foreign Secretary of the Soviets
proclaim that ‘universal values should have priority over class, group or other interests.6° The warning
remained unheeded, and the Russian Empire has collapsed, purely because of its inability to build internal
cohesion. At the ethical plane, this decries, in a way, the validity of Darwinism, and its struggle for existence,
and Marxism with its dialectical movement of class struggle. It involves equal condemnation of economic
wars, cut-throat competition, consumerism and increasing disparities in capitalist societies.
From the point of view of internal cohesion, the position in the capitalist countries of the West is no
better. Mounting number of divorces, broken homes, drug addiction, alcoholism, and individualism have
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
created such a situation in North America, which made the Christian Church raised a strong voice saying that
secularism was a common danger and needed to be eliminated as a social force, and that Christianity should
seek the co-operation of other religions to combat its evil influence. Christianity had given to the empirical
life in the West its cohesion, strength and elan; the divorce of religion from politics and the empirical life, has
left secularism a barren institution without any hope of a creative future. This is the tragedy both of
communism and capitalism. It is this tragedy with its dark future that the North American Churches wanted
to avoid. But in the temper of the times, this voice of sanity was drowned in an exhibition of suicidal egoism
of the European Churches who felt that “Secularization, not secularism, is the primary process. It is a
process in which some of the values of Christian faith have been put into a secular framework, bringing about
a powerful force which is destroying all old ideas. Hence, secularization is an ally, because it will destroy
Hinduism, Islam and other forms of what they considered to be superstition. So, we should ally ourselves
with secularization and see it as the work of God.” Later, it was again repeated : “We do not feel that we
have anything lacking. And so we are opposed to dialogue unless it is for the sake of testifying to Jesus
Christ.” “That was it. Then they passed a resolution saying that under no circumstances should multi-
religious dialogues be undertaken because multi-religious dialogues put Christianity on the same level as other
religions, and this is unacceptable. So, because the European Christians had that point of view, the World
Council of Churches has not been able to engage in multi-religious dialogues for quite some time.’’
This is the state of affairs of the moral life of man in Western countries that lead the dominant
culture of our times. Recently, however, some priests in Latin America have raised a voice for an integrated
and composite culture of Liberation Theology, invoking the Bible in support of a revolutionary struggle to
help the poor. Father C. Torres states, “The Catholic who is not a revolutionary is living in mortal sin.’
Theologian Moltmann says, “Political theology wants to awaken political consciousness in every treatise of
Christian theology. Understood in this way, it is the premise that leads to the conclusion that, while there
may be naive or politically unaware theology, there can be no apolitical theology.” He concludes, “The
memory of Christ crucified compels us to a political theology.” But these are still minority voices in the
Christian world.
ISLAM
Islam started with a full-blooded combination between the spiritual life and the empirical life of man.
It is this combination that swept everything before it and created an epoch which is unrivalled in its
achievements. It is a religious system and culture, which is, in many respects, more comprehensive and
unified than the parochial culture of the city states of Greece. It is hardly complimentary to the Christian
world of the West that while today it seeks to fashion many of its cultural institutions on the basis of Greek
classical models, yet these, but for the interlude of the Islamic epoch which preserved most of the Greek
thought, would have been lost to posterity. Never was the concept of human brotherhood advanced, in
thought and deed, on a scale as during this epoch. It speaks volumes for the liberalism of Islamic culture that
the heydays of the Judaic literature, philosophy and thought synchronise with the countries and periods of
Islamic rule. Not only were some of the Jewish classics written, but Maimonides, the king of Judaic
philosophy, also flourished and wrote during the Muslim rule. As against it, under Christian rulers, the Jews
suffered periodical massacres, persecution and the segregated life of the ghetto. Admittedly, the Muslim
rulers were, by comparison, quite liberal towards the followers of other religions. Islamic contribution to the
scientific thought of the day was significant. But far more important is the contribution of men like Al
Qushairi, Al Ghazali and Arbi to the religious thought of man.
There is, however, little doubt that mystic quietism and otherworldliness of Sufis is a growth that
appeared during the time of later Caliphs, when they indulged in luxurious and un-Islamic living. It has
happened in the case of Judaism and of Islam, both whole-life religions, that in times when religiously
sensitive souls found it difficult to face the social or socio-political challenges, they withdrew themselves into
the shell of quietism, otherworldliness, monasticism and asceticism. Sufi sects appeared all over the Muslim
world, but they never posed a challenge to the oppression and misrule of the Muslim emperors or kings. In
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
this respect, the Jewish prophets were quite bold in their criticism of Jewish rulers, including David and
Solomon.
It is very significant, and shows the lofty spiritual status of the Sikh Gurus and the basic ideological
affinity between the two religions, that a Sufi saint like Pir Buddhu Shah fought and sacrificed two of his sons
for the cause of Guru Gobind Singh.” But it was the Sikh Gurus and not the Sufis who challenged the
growing Mughal tyranny. This instance demonstrates that although as an organisation, Sufis had become
otherworldly and failed to confront the major challenge of societal oppression in the Muslim empires, yet
when the Sikh Gurus had actually taken up the challenge and the ideological struggle was on, the Sufi saint
made it clear that, considering the tenets of Islam, on which side should be the sympathies of a pious person.
There are, however, some scholars like Iqbal and Abdus Salam who believe that like the
otherworldliness of the Christians, as in the case of the Roman Empire, Sufis also became a significant cause
of the decline of the Muslim cultural supremacy in the world. For, there is considerable truth in Dr
Mohammad Iqbal’s couplet : “Whether it be the facade of a great republic, or the domain of a glorious
empire, if its polity is divorced of the religious component, the system is reduced to sheer Changezian
barbarity and tyranny.” Thoughtful and saner elements in the Muslim world seem to be disillusioned with the
bankrupt Western Secularism, and are trying to revert to a reformed and composite culture of Islam.
RELIGIOUS HISTORY AND CREATION OF THE KHALSA
In our brief survey, we have indicated four categories of religious systems. The Indian systems are
all dichotomous. To the second category belongs pacifist Christianity which, though it originally suggested
the love of one’s neighbour as oneself, has gradually but ultimately reduced itself to sheer Secularism,
Individualism and Consumerism, bereft of any religious component. To the third category belong Judaism
and Islam which started with a full-blooded combination of the spiritual life with the empirical life, but
ultimately, under pressure of circumstances, bifurcated, on the one hand, into otherworldliness or mystic
quietism, and, on the other hand, into the pursuit of worldly gains and sheer animal survival.
Sikhism belongs to a different or a fourth category of the religious systems. For the purpose of
understanding, clarity and comparison, it will help us if we recapitulate the salient features of Sikhism. The
Gurus say that the Basic Reality is creative and free. It has a Direction and a Will. It is the Ocean of Values,
Destroyer of evil-doers, Benevolent and Beneficent. That Reality is Love and we can be at peace with
ourselves and the world only if we live a life of love and fall in line with the Direction of that Reality. Though
ego is God created and man is at present at the ego-conscious (manmukh) stage of development, it is his
destiny to evolve and reach the stage of Universal or God-consciousness and work in line with His Altruistic
Will, ie., achieve the garmukh stage of development, when alone he can ‘be spontaneously moral’ and ‘live
truthfully.’ At the present, or the egoistic stage of his development, man cannot avoid conflicts and suicidal
wars. It is a futile search to try and find the moral base of man either in the animal life or in the material
constituents of man. Nor can reason, which is just a tool of the egoistic psyche, like any other limb of the
individual, devise and give man a helpful ethics. God or the Basic Reality, which is Love, can alone be the
source of the moral life of man. Ultimately, it is only God or Naam-consciousness, involving link with the
Basic Fount of Love, that can lead to truthful living. That is why the Guru says, “Naam-consciousness and
ego-consciousness cannot go together.”’! The two are contradictory to each other. It is a hymn of
fundamental significance. For, ego-consciousness means man’s alienation from the basic Force of Love.
And, greater the alienation or isolation of man from his spiritual and moral source, the greater would be his
drive towards destruction. Secularism as an institution represents that egoistic isolation. This trend, the Guru
says, is inconsistent with the path towards link with the Universal Consciousness, the spring of moral life.
The Gurus have given a lead to man in this field. Ten Gurus or ten gurmukhs, lived the life of God-
consciousness. In one sense, it is the life of one gurmukh completing a demonstration and furthering the
progress of life and its spiritual evolution and ascent. Guru Nanak’s thesis involved the integration of the
spiritual life of man with his empirical life. This integration has to enrich life and society. Because of the
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
earlier cultural and religious tradition, it took ten lives for Guru Nanak, the gurmukh or Sant-Sipabi, to
demonstrate his thesis and role, and discharge his social responsibilities.
These socio-spiritual responsibilities involved not only the creation of a society motivated with new
ideas, but also the completion of the five tasks Guru Nanak had indicated as targets before himself and his
society. With every succeeding Guru, the ideal of gurmukh or Sant-Sipahi, as laid down and lived by Guru
Nanak, unfolded itself progressively. It is a path of love, humility, service, sacrifice, martyrdom and total
responsibility as the instrument of God, the basic Universal Consciousness moving the world.
A question may be asked as to why there have been ten incarnations of Guru Nanak in Sikhism,
while in other religions there have generally been only one prophet. To us, four reasons appear quite
obvious. First, in a society in which dichotomous religions stand deeply embedded and established for over
three thousand years and which claims to have contributed asceticism and monasticism to the cultures of the
rest of the world, it was not easy for a whole-life religion with its mri-piri concept to be acceptable and take
firm roots in one generation. Second, the Sikh ideology did not involve individual salvation, or a gurmukh just
living truthfully; but it also involved compulsively the creation of a society motivated with new aspirations
and ideals. And this new orientation and conditioning could be done only by the process of creating a new
ideology, embodying it in a new scripture, organising new institutions, socio-religious practices and centres of
the new faith, and inspiring people, by the method of martyrdoms, into accepting a new ethical standard or
morality and values. For, as Ambedkar’? and Max Weber have stated, the Hindu society cannot be reformed
from inside, and rid itself from the unjust system of caste and untouchability, because the Varn Ashram
Dharma has the sanction of Shashtras and scriptures; and a Hindu while making caste distinctions and
exhibiting caste prejudices never feels any moral guilt or abhorrence. Instead, he feels a real sense of religious
and moral satisfaction that he is observing his Dharma and Shastric injunctions. Hence, the inevitable necessity
of creating a new ideology and Scripture with a new religious and socio-moral code of conduct. Third, even
if the ideology and institutions had been there, the Sikh society would, like some reformed societies, soon
have reverted to the parent society, if it had not successfully achieved the social targets discussed above,
including those of creating a fraternal society of householders, of dislodging the political misrule, and sealing
the North-Western gate of India against the invaders.
The fourth reason appears to be very important. Our survey of the major religions of the world
shows that revealed systems which start with a combination of the spiritual life with the empirical life and
even with clear social objectives, over a period of time, either shed their social ideals and become pacifist,
otherworldly, or a salvation religion, or become dichotomous, bifurcating, on the one hand, into monasticism,
and, on the other hand, into either political misrule and tyranny or sheer secularism. Sikhism does not stand
any such danger of ideological decline or bifurcation, because of its gradual and firm ascent and unfolding. It
shows the prophetic vision of Guru Nanak that he not only profusely and clearly defined all aspects of his
life-affirming and integrated ideology, but also detailed the targets his society had to achieve. He laid the firm
foundations of the institutions and the socio-religious structure his successors had to develop and complete.
Guru Nanak defined his God not only as the Ocean of Virtues, but also as a Sant-Sipahi or the Destroyer of
the evil-doers; and the ideal he laid down for the seeker was to be the instrument of the Will of such a God.
Guru Arjun gave instructions to his son to militarise the movement and thereafter, as was explained by Guru
Hargobind to Sant Ramdas,” his sword was for the protection of the weak and the destruction of the tyrant.
While Guru Arjun, the first martyr of the faith, had confrontation with the empire and gave orders for
militarisation, the subsequent five Gurus manifestly proclaimed and practised the spiritual ideal of Sant-Sipabi.
So, whatever some votaties of pacifist or dichotomous ideologies or other outsiders may say, to students of
Sikhism or a seeker of the Sikh ideal, there can never be any doubt as to the integrated mir7-piri or Sant-Sipahi
ideal in Sikhism. Because in the eyes of a Sikh, any reversion to ideas of pacificism, personal salvation or
monasticism would be a manifest fall from the spiritual ideology laid down by Guru Nanak, enshrined in
Guru Granth Sahib, and openly, single-mindedly and demonstrably lived by the ten Gurus, culminating in the
creation of the Khalsa, with A7rpan as the essential symbol for resisting injustice and oppression. The &/rpan
essentially signifies two fundamental tenets of Sikhism, namely, that it is the basic responsibility of a Sikh to
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
confront and resist injustice, and that asceticism, monasticism, or escapism, of any kind is wrong. Thus, the
kirpan, on the one hand, is a constant reminder to the Sikh of his duty, and, on the other hand, is a standing
guard against reversion to pacificism and otherworldliness. The extreme sagacity and vision of the Sikh
Gurus is evident from the thoughtfully planned and measured manner in which they built the structure of
their ideology and the Sikh society, epitomised in the order of the Khalsa. That is also the reason that so far
as the ideology and ideals of the Sikh society are concerned, there cannot be any ambiguity in that regard.
Hence, considering the manner in which the lives of the ten Gurus have demonstrated the Sikh way of life,
the question of its bifurcation or accepting pacificism or otherworldliness does not arise. And this forms, we
believe, the fourth important reason for there being ten Gurus and the closure of succession after the Khalsa
was created.
CONCLUSION
The summary of the Sikh ideology, in the background of the religious history of some higher
religions, makes the viewpoint of the Sikh Gurus and the Sikh position very clear. The Gurus emphasise that
at the manmukh stage of man’s development, man is constitutionally incapable of avoiding injustice, wars and
conflicts. Because, man is basically egocentric and stands alienated from the Fundamental Force (God) which
is Love. So long as he does not link himself with the Flow of Love and fails to work in unison with it, his
problems of clash, disharmony and tensions will continue. The diagnosis of the authors of Limits of Growth is
also the same, namely, that unless man is able to shed his egocentrism, there appears little hope for peace and
happiness in the world.”
The state is an instrument devised by man to curb the basic egocentrism or wickedness of individuals
and power groups. But, politics divorced from the Fundamental Spiritual Force, or moral brakes creates the
situation that the State or Establishment is seized by individuals and groups, who openly use and employ all
the enormous means of the modern state for the satisfaction of their egocentrism, working to the detriment
of the masses and the poor. And the more backward or poor a country, the greater the oppression
uninhibited secularism can do with the power machine of the state. The result, logically and unavoidably, is
that the gap between the downtrodden masses and the oppressive elites goes on widening. This happens
both within a state, and among the various national states. We wonder if anyone who is acquainted with
recent history, can contradict this observation.
Rationally speaking, secularism is incapable of reversing the present trend, or finding a solution of
the existing malady. The causes for this failure have been stressed by the Gurus. Reason being a tool or limb
of the egocentric man (wanmukh) and being unconnected with the Universal Consciousness or spirituo-moral
base of man, it can never make the individual spontaneously altruistic. Hence, any search for a humanitarian
ethics through empiricism, communism or secularism is doomed to failure. The hopes which science in the
first decades of the century had raised, stand tragically shattered.
To us, materialism and morality seem a contradiction in terms. Similarly, dichotomous or life-
negating religions are equally amoral in their social impact. It is because of the Indian religions being
dichotomous that the unjust secular institution of Varn Ashram Dharma and caste could continue in the
Indian society, and also have the approval of its scriptures. The study of the three Western religions of
Judaism, Christianity and Islam also furnishes the same lesson. The moment any of these societies became
otherworldly, or showed dichotomous tendencies, the moral strength of the society to face the challenges of
life became minimal. Or vice versa, the society became dichotomous, when it failed to face effectively the
challenges of life. And, ultimately it is the moral stamina of a people or culture that by and large determines
its survival. This is evident from the known history, both of Judaism and Islam. But for the subordination of
religious institutions to the national state, following the Reformation, the triumph of secularism and scientism
to erode the Christian ethical base from the Western life would never have been possible. The ethical field
today is in complete disarray. Since religion is the only source which could furnish the moral sap to
maintain social cohesion, and Christian elan being at its lowest ebb, the twentieth century has witnessed the
worst slaughter and butchery of tens of millions, both at the international and the national levels. Hitler,
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Stalin and Hiroshima are phenomena of the twentieth century secularism. The nations of the world are
spending on arms a thousand billion dollars each year. It is this dismal spectacle that had, on the one hand,
forced the Soviets to talk of the ‘priority of universal values over the class or group values’, and, on the other
hand, led the North American Churches to suggest co-operation with other religions in order to fight the
common danger of secularism. For the present, either out of their ignorance, or for other reasons, the
European Churches have overruled the American view. But, the problem remains and stands highlighted by
thinking persons. Decades back, Collingwood wrote : “The discovery of a relation is at once the discovery of
my thought as reaching God and of God’s thought as reaching me; and indistinguishable from this, the
performance of an act of mine by which I establish a relation with God and an act of God’s by which He
establishes a relation with me. To fancy that religion lives either below or above the limits of reflective
thought is fatally to misconceive either the nature of religion or the nature of reflective thought. It would be
nearer the truth to say that in religion, the life of reflection is concentrated in its intensest form, and that the
special problems of the theoretical and practical life all take their special forms by segregation out of the body
of religious consciousness and retain their vitality only so far as they preserve their connexion with it and with
each other in it.’ This statement presents the view that unless reason and religion ate combined, or the
spiritual life is combined with the empirical life of man, his problems will remain insolvable. Reason is
incapable of devising or creating a moral force. Hence, the inherent incapacity of secularism to create any
worthwhile values, much less universal values. The fall of the Russian Empire has made this clear.
Five hundred years ago, Guru Nanak emphasised that unless the spiritual component enriches the
empirical life, man’s problems of conflict, war and disharmony will remain. The solution lies in working in
consonance with God’s Will or the Basic Force of Love and Altruism. The brotherhood of man cannot be a
reality without accepting the Fatherhood of God. For the Gurus, the Fatherhood of God or Force of Love
or Universal Consciousness is not an assumption, but a reality. For them, it is a true and most indubitable
experience, spontaneously leading to activity. It is an experience far more real than the sensory perception of
external phenomena or the construction of a pragmatic or utilitarian ethics, or the assumption of a dialectical
movement raised by human reason. The Gurus exhort man to follow the path of altruistic deeds to reach the
next evolutionary stage of gurmukh or God-man. It is a worldview of combining the spiritual life with the
empirical life of man, thereby breaking the alienation from which man suffers. It is a worldview of total
responsibility towards every sphere of life, the God-man’s sphere of responsibility being co-terminus with the
sphere of God. At a time when most of the higher religions have either become dichotomous, or are
withdrawing from the main fields of social responsibility, and human reason feels frustrated, the Sikh Gurus
express a comprehensive worldview of hope and eternal relevance. At the same time, it is important to state
that, far from being exclusive, Sikhism is universal in its approach, always anxious and willing to serve and co-
operate with those who aim at harmony among beings and welfare of man. For, the Guru’s prayer to God is
that the world may be saved by any way. He may be Gracious enough to do.” And, Guru Nanak proclaimed
that his mission was, with the help of other God-men, to steer man across the turbulent sea of life.”* This
fundamental ideal stands enshrined in the final words of the daily Sikh prayer, “May God bless all mankind.”
REFERENCES
Guru Granth Sahib, p. 459.
Ibid., p. 294.
Ibid., p. 955.
Ibid., p. 8.
Ibid., p. 859.
Stace, W. T. : Mysticism and Philosophy, pp. 131, 133.
Huxley, Aldous : Moksha, p. 175.
Ibid., pp. 222, 223.
Guru Granth Sahib, p. 830.
SOUR. SV ION OT Ge Noe
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
10. Zimmer, H. : Philosophies of India, pp. 222-223.
11. Journal of Sikh Studies, Vol. VH, February-August, 1980, p. 38.
12. Ibid.
13. Jain, N. K. : Sikh Gurus and Indian Spiritual Thought, p. 108.
14. Jaiswal, Suvira : Origin and Development of Vaisnavism, pp. 116-118.
15. Murthy, H. V.S. : Vatsnavism of Shankradeva and Ramanuya, p. 232.
16. Juergensmeyer, Mark : S7kb Studies, pp. 83-88.
17. Guru Granth Sahib, p. 473.
18. Bhai Gurdas, Var 1.
19. Guru Granth Sahib, p. 1.
20. Ibid., p. 1412.
21. Macauliffe,M. A.: The Sikh Religion, Vol. III, pp. 7-8, 419.
22. Guru Granth Sahib, p. 7.
23. Ibid., pp. 8-9.
24, Ibid., p. 62.
25. Ibid., p. 113.
26. Ibid., p. 473.
27. Panjab Past and Present, October, 1976, p. 468.
28. Guru Granth Sahib, p. 1243.
29... Ibid.,"p. 730:
30. Wilson, H. H. : Religious Sects of Hindus, p. 19.
31. Briges, G. W. : Gorakhnath and Kanphata Yogis, p. 32.
32. Guru Granth Sahib, p. 1245.
33. Ibid., p. 886.
34. Ibid., p. 1171.
35, « [Bids pn 682.
36. Ibid., p. 417.
37. Russell, Bertrand : Héstory of Western Philosophy, p. 362-363.
38. Dowley, Tim (Ed.) : Eerdman’s Handbook to the History of Christianity, p. 5.
39. Guru Granth Sahib, pp. 360, 417-418.
40. Ibid., p. 1028.
41. Ibid. p. 224.
42. Ibid., p. 145.
43, Ibid., p. 1289.
44, Ibid., p. 472.
45. Bhalla, Sarup Dass : Mehbma Prakash, p. 326.
46. Gupta, H.R. : History of the Sikh Gurus, p. 110.
47. Saina-Pat : Gur Sobba, pp. 21, 32.
48. Bute Shah : Tawarikh-i-Hind, pp. 405-406.
49. Gurdev Singh : S7kb Tradition, pp. 183-227.
50. Cunningham, J.D. : History of the Sikhs, p. 64.
51. Guru Granth Sahib, p. 176.
52. Ibid., p. 631.
53... Tbid.,:p:.913.
54. Ibid., p. 913.
55. Ibid., p. 113.
56. Hertzberg, Arthur (Ed.) : Judaism, p. 98.
57. Zvi Cahn : Philosophy of Judaism, pp. 503-504.
58. Smart, Ninian: The Religious Experience of Mankind, pp. 356-358.
59. Zvi Cahn: op. cit., p. 504 Roth. Cecil : Short History of the Jewish People, pp. 45-52, 57.
60. Hawking, Stephen :A Brief History of Time, pp. 177-178.
61. Bible: John, p. 15, Mathew, p. 22.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
62. Toynbee, Arnold, J. : Christianity and Civilisation, pp. 14-17.
63. Dowley, Tim (Ed.) : op. cit., pp. 204-207.
64. Toynbee, Arnold, J.: An Historian’s Approach to Religion, p. 210.
65. Dowley, Tim (Ed.) : op. cit., pp. 570-571.
66. The Tribune : July 12-13, 1990.
67. Dialogue & Alliance : A Journal of International Religious Foundation, Summer 1987, Vol. 1,
pp. 94-96.
68. Dowley, Tim (Ed.) : op. cit., p. 610.
69. Moltmann, J. e a/: Religion and Political Society, pp. 19, 46.
70. Panikkar, K. M. : Hindu Society at Cross Roads, p. 18.
71. Guru Granth Sahib, p. 560.
72. Ambedkar, B. R. : Annihilation of Caste, (an undelivered speech edited by Mulkh Raj Anand).
73. Gupta, H.R. : Hestory of the Sikhs, Vol. 1, p. 163.
74. Limits of Growth: A report for the Club of Rome’s Project. pp. 191-192.
75. Schumacher, E. F. :.A Guide to the Perplexed, p. 132.
76. Collingwood, R. G. : Idea of History, pp. 314-315.
77. Guru Granth Sahib, p. 853.
78¢-, bids, ps 939:
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
8
SIKHISM: A MIRI-PIRI SYSTEM
KHARAK SINGH
I. INTRODUCTION
1.1 On the miri-piri concept in Sikhism a lot of literature has appeared, both in English and Punjabi.
The Department of Guru Granth Sahib Studies, Punjabi University Patiala, devoted a whole issue of its
journal in order to emphasise that this concept is fundamental to Sikhism. Since then, however, articles have
appeared in some papers and journals that seek to confuse the issue. Therefore, a reiteration of the basic
character of this concept of Sikhism will not be out of place. Before that, however, it seems necessary to
briefly recount some other fundamental beliefs that underlie this doctrine :
(a) Concept Of God In Sikhism: In every spiritual system the concept of God or the Spiritual Reality
determines its worldview and its structure. In the hymns of the Japu ji, Guru Nanak calls Him the Creator
Person, Self-existent, Eternally True and Guru. As Guru, He is both Enlightener and Guide. Further, He is
called the Master, the Emperor who is benevolent and directs the world with His Will. He is not only the
Creator Person, but is also immanent in the world and is the Fount of all values and virtues. This is how
Guru Nanak describes Him.
(b) Spiritual Experience: The spiritual experience of the Guru further highlights that ‘He is All Love,
and the rest He is ineffable.”! The important aspect of this spiritual experience is that the Basic Reality, apart
from being the Master of the creation, is guiding it with love. It is this spiritual experience of the Guru,
which determines the Sikh world-view : that the world is real, and not an illusion or mithya. The bani says,
“True is He; True is His Creation.” “True are Thy continents, and true Thy universes. True are Thy worlds
and the forms created by Thee.”? A consequential implication of a Loving God is that He expresses His love
and all virtues in this world. This further fortifies the inference about the reality and meaningfulness of the
universe. It also implies that the universe is not a purposeless mass of confusion, but is directed with a Will
which is Altruistic. Also, the Fundamental Reality is deeply interested in guiding the world in all its spheres.
As Emperor and Master of the world, He guides both the p77 and the iri aspects of the universe. In fact, as
its Benevolent Guide, He hardly makes as division between these two aspects, which are just man-made
distinctions or splittings. It gives spiritual sanction to moral life of man, because the Basic Reality is the
Fount of all virtues and values.
(c) Goal of Life: It is in this background of his description of the Basic Reality and his Spiritual
Experience, that Guru Nanak lays down the goal of man in the very beginning of Guru Granth Sahib. He
categorically rejects the ascetic path of withdrawal, remaining silent, one-point meditation or the like, and lays
down that the path for the spiritual man is to move and work according to His Will? This is the emphatic
goal in Sikhism. As compared to the earlier Indian systems, it completely changes the very basis and direction
of pursuit of religion. The failure of many scholars to grasp the radical departures Guru Nanak makes, is due
to the lazy notion that Guru Nanak was just a quietist Sant, or a part of the Bhakti movement. Keeping in
view the spiritual experience of the Guru the changes he made were both natural and essential. For, where
God, the Mzr-Piri Master, is deeply interested in the world, and in guiding all spheres of life with His
Altruistic Will, for the spiritual seeker to drop out or be interested in only a part of it, would be incongruous,
if not defiant and self-contradictory. Thus in Guru Nanak’s system, for a Sikh to be a disinterested onlooker
of the world and life, is out of the question. In short, Guru Nanak lays down a fully life-affirming goal for
the spiritual man without any aspect of it being taboo for him.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
(d) Methodology: It is in the background of his spiritual experience and his concept of God, that Guru
Nanak lays down the methodology of his system which, as we shall find, is so logically necessary. Its first
corollary is that withdrawal, monasticism and asceticism are rejected; and instead, the householdet’s life is
accepted. He condemns the yogis for “being idlers, and not being ashamed of begging alms at the very door
of the householder whose life they spurn.” He declares that “liberation is possible even while playing and
laughing” and that “the God-centered lives truthfully, while a householder.”’4 Every earlier Indian system
accepts monasticism, asceticism, or sanyasa. In fact, asceticism is considered to be the Indian contribution to
the world culture. Yet, straight away Guru Nanak rejects all such worldviews, as directly or indirectly give
credence to these institutions. It is important to grasp that there is nothing like half life-affirmation or half
life-negation. Life is one composite whole. It has no non-essential compartments, that can be ignored or
rejected. God is the Gracious Master of the entire universe and life, and for that matter, faith in Him leaves
the seeker no choice to select some aspects and leave others. This is the fundamental spiritual fact which has
to be grasped, so as to understand the revolutionary changes in goals, direction, ethics and methodology
Guru Nanak makes. Thus the first corollary of his system is to accept every aspect of life and share its
responsibilities.
1.2 The equality that Guru Nanak prescribes, is not only between man and man, but also between
man and woman. The second part is a major departure from earlier religious thought and a monumental
contribution to spiritual advancement of mankind. Guru Nanak was the first man of God to lay down this
principle and bring about the change. All the Hindu systems including the Vedic and Vedantic systems,
Vaishnavism, Upanishadic and Na# sects, had approved of the sanctity of caste. Some bhagats and mystics in
India and abroad, did support and accept the equality of man. Yet, none of them had accepted the equality of
man and woman which Guru Nanak emphasised. Scholars have failed to realise the implications of this
major change. Neither Buddhism and Jainism, nor Islam and Christianity, gave full equality to woman. The
reason for it is obvious. In these systems monasticism and withdrawal remain approved religious practices,
and celibacy is a virtue. In this background, by implication, woman became essentially a temptress. Thus,
neither Hindu systems, nor Christianity and Islam, could give equality to woman. Withdrawal from life and
downgrading of women, have indirectly been approved by even the bhagats or sants. IKK. Schomer and W. D.
Plaperty call Bhagat Kabir ascetic in his views and a misogynist.> But in a life-affirming system, complete
equality of man and woman is a must, as also the sanctity of a householdet’s life. In order to emphasise this
principle, not only Guru Nanak but every Sikh Guru, except Guru Har Krishan, who died at a very early age,
led a married householdet’s life. Otherwise, this aspect of his system would have been misunderstood,
especially in the Indian context. So much so, that the Sikh Gurus later avoided inclusion in the Sikh society
of those who believed in ascetic practices.° Guru Nanak emphasises that the spiritual man has to partake in
the whole of life, and that he cannot shirk any of the responsibilities of a householder. Hence, the
revolutionary significance of Guru Nanak’s principle of equality, which embraces both man and woman.
This principle, which is so logical considering his system, is in the religious background of man entirely new.
1.3. The corollary of rejecting monasticism is that the seeker has to express his sense of spirituality in
virtuous activity and deeds. The stress is that in ultimate analysis all spirituality has to be lived in the form of
human conduct and work. The bani says : “Man’s assessment in His Court is done on the basis of his deed.”
“It is by one’s deeds that we get nearer to or away from God.” “Everything is lower than truth; higher still is
truthful living.” “Gurmukh always lives truthfully.”
1.4 This is the second fundamental of Guru Nanak’s methodology. He calls life a game of love, and
says, “If you want to play the game of Love, enter my lane with your head on your palm, and, once on this
path, then sacrifice your head ungrudginely.’”§ This principle he has unambiguously and repeatedly
emphasised in his hymns in the Japu ji and elsewhere. For, a follower of God’s Will cannot remain a
bystander in life. He has to work according to his capacity. Thus, Guru Nanak’s system is not only a whole-
life spiritual venture, but also a life of continuous love and altruistic activity. Further, the responsibilities of
the spiritual man, prescribed by Guru Nanak, logically follow from this. He stresses the need of productive
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
work, which involves sustenance of man and life. He clearly deprecates the idleness of yogis and ascetics, and
recommends a life devoted to virtuous deeds.
1.5 Here it would be relevant to state that while bhagats like Namdev and Ravidas favour withdrawal
from life, the Guru says : “The person incapable of earning his living, gets his ears split (turns a Nath Yogi)
and becomes a mendicant. He calls himself a guru or a saint. Do not look up to him, nor touch his feet. He
alone knows the way who earns his living and shares his earnings with other.’ In this regard Machwe writes
: “The conflict between a rightful performance of duty and all-absorbing love of God, has existed at all times
and in all countries. But it seems that the saints of this period were inclined in the latter rather than in the
former direction, and exhibited an all-absorbing character of God realisation. God indeed is an all devourer,
and it seems from examples of these saints, that He devours also the performance of one’s own natural
duties.”!0 Nihar Ranjan Ray writes : “They had no other social purpose in view than to make better
individuals from out of the groups that assembled around them. Their aim seems to have been the
individual, not the society in any significant sense.” “These leaders seem to have been individuals working
out their own problems and towards achieving their personal religious and spiritual aims and aspirations.!!
The responsibility about sharing is equally important, Guru Nanak and the other Gurus recommend sharing
of the Lord’s wealth and bounties, and deprecate grabbing and accumulation of wealth. The bani says :
“God’s bounty belongs to all, but men grab it for themselves.” “Man gathers riches by making others
miserable.” !2
1.6 Another responsibility, which is so natural and logical in Guru Nanak’s system, but which is new
in the Indian context, is the spiritual man’s responsibility to resist and confront injustice and oppression.
Here again, what Guru Nanak did was, in the Indian religious tradition, absolute radical. In India all earlier
religions and systems accepted the value of sanyasa, withdrawal, monasticism, celibacy and abimsa. The
Kshatriya alone was asked to fight but that only as a part of his caste duties. Any departure from the duties
of one’s caste, was frowned upon in the Bhagwat Gita’? and other Hindu scriptures. But Guru Nanak, being
very conscious of this background and having laid for the seeker the responsibility of resisting injustice and
oppression, took a number of tangible steps to clarify the issue. First, unlike most saints and bhagats, he
criticised in detail all the faults in the social, administrative, religious and political life of his times. He
deprecated the hypocrisy, greed and evil ways of pundits and mullahs, the social discrimination and practices of
pollution following the caste prohibitions, the corruption, bribery and blood sucking practised by public
functionaries in the Administration, the luxurious life lived by the rulers, their oppression of the people and
their failure to give security of life to their subjects, and the tyranny, cruelty and butchery indulged in by the
invaders. Few saints, prophets or mystics have so clearly described the faults and dark spots in the socio-
political life of the times, as did Guru Nanak. The second step he took in this direction is manifest in his
hymn in which he complains to God for allowing the weak to be trampled upon by the strong. It is a hymn
of crucial significance and implications. It is in fact a corollary of the miri-pirt system which he followed. The
first implication of this hymn is that in the Order of God, oppression of the weak and the downtrodden is an
aberration. The second inference is that this being so, it is primarliy the duty of the spiritual man, as an
instrument of God’s Will and Order, to undo and resist oppression and injustice. The third inference is that,
as such, it is the duty of his disciples and the Sikh society he was creating, to face and tackle all problems of
injustice and oppression. And the fourth one is that, in this context, a society with necessary wherewithal had
to be created, which should be in a position to undo injustice. In order to shoulder this spiritual
responsibility and accomplish the task, again it is Guru Nanak, who initiated three steps. First, he started the
organisation of a Sikh society or sangats which could carry on his mission and discharge its responsibilities.
And, it was at the time of Guru Nanak that such organisations were created at different places he visited.
The second step which he took was to discard the institution of ahimsa. This was an essential step for any
society that had to confront the might of tyrants, oppressors and the unjust. This is a particularly significant
step, because all the religious Indians, including the bhagats, were devoted votaries of ahimsa as a creed. Guru
Nanak stated that people did not understand what was sin, and were confused over issues like vegetarianism
and the use of force.'* Guru Nanak clearly saw that no society that had to undo injustice and oppression,
could remain fettered with impediments like ahimsa. And the third important step which Guru Nanak took
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
was that, since the society he was creating was still in its infancy, and could not be motivated overnight to
face the gigantic problems of injustice and oppression in the conditions then prevailing in India, and since it
was to be a great long-drawn task to train and condition people to accept the responsibility of undoing
injustice, he started the institution of appointing a successor, so that the succeeding Gurus could accomplish
the targets and tasks of his mission. From the above it is evident that the mir/-piri thesis is a part of the
spiritual experience of Guru Nanak, and that it is also he who in his own lifetime took all the necessary and
basic steps, theoretical as well as organisational, to implement and continue his spiritual mission. This
explains the uncommon system of appointing a successor which no other bhagat or prophet adopted, but
which Guru Nanak considered essential for the continuance and completion of his mission.
II. GROWTH OF MIRI-PIRI TRADITION
2.1. Now we have to look at the development of the mii-piri tradition initiated by Guru Nanak,
during the period of the subsequent Gurus. We have explained that a whole-life or a mir-piri system is
fundamental to Guru Nanak’s spiritual perception and the mission he started. Guru Nanak had taken clear
and firm steps to lay the foundations of the mii-piri structure. The measures he took in his life-time and the
system of succession he introduced, cannot be explained otherwise, than as a consequence of his whole-life
system and his desire to develop it further through his successors. In fact, the introduction of the idea of
succession, becomes un-understandable, unless it is seen as a cleat, conscious, and specific step toward
building a miri-piri structure and society. For, so far as the ideology was concerned, it had been laid down in
Guru Nanak’s hymns in Guru Granth Sahib completely, very succintly and emphatically. The subsequent
Gurus made no addition to or alteration in the thesis of Guru Nanak. Their role can thus be understood
primarily as development, demonstration and implementation of Guru Nanak’s mission in the socio-spiritual
field. It is not at all meant that other aspects of his system were not carried out. But, because of the need of
the subject under discussion, in the subsequent patagraphs, we shall confine our narration of events to the
development of the miri-piri aspect of Guru Nanak’s mission. For that reason our statements may sometimes
look unavoidable selective.
2.2 It is on record that when Guru Nanak visited Guru Angad at Khadur Sahib, shortly after the
latter’s appointment as Guru, he found him leading a somewhat secluded life. He, therefore, reminded him
that he was expected to organise and lead a mission and that, as such, further extensive steps had to be taken.
Guru Angad took three tangible measures which indicate that Sikhism was to develop as a socio-spititual
growth and society. He strengthened the institution of /angar, which Guru Nanak had initiated. Its social role
was expanded. The Guru’s wife (Mata Khivi) was put in charge of it. This institution, as a measure of attack
against caste distinctions and of providing free food for the indigent, was apparently well-known in the area,
and finds mention in Guru Granth Sahib. Second, he made it clear that recluses could not be welcome in the
Sikh society, since their otherworldly ideology was incongruous with Guru Nanak’s system.!° Third, the
Guru promoted the physical well-being of the members of the society through physical training and health
activities. A gurdwara called Mal Akharan at Khadur Sahib, where the Guru patronised and personally
supervised wrestling and other sports, is a monument to this measure adopted by him.
2.3. The third Guru, Amar Das shifted the venue of his activities to Goindwal which was on the
bank of the river Beas and a known place of crossing the river. Guru Amar Das took an unusual step to
emphasise the institution of /angar. No one, big or small, could join his sangaé, until he had given evidence of
his anti-caste and anti-pollution views by eating on a common platform of food from the Guru’s common
kitchen, where no distinction of high and low, Brahmin or non-Brahmin, was made, and where food was
cooked by any of the Sikhs irrespective of his or her caste. The significance of the measure is tremendous,
considering the fact that in the Hindu temples, Nath monastries, or other religious places of Vaishnavas, food
is cooked by Brahmins alone.!? The republican and anti-caste character of this measure can also be guaged
from the fact that, even in the twentieth century, a statue of a Brahmin unveiled by the then Deputy Prime
Minister of India, was considered to have been defiled, because of the touch of the Minister, who belonged to
a low caste, and had later to be purified with waters from the Ganges. The hold of the caste structure is so
pervasive, that even Mahatma Gandhi in this century felt that unfettered entry of untouchables into the
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Hindu temples was not possible because of the religious injunctions, which evidently he was not willing to
disturb or violate, because of his faith in the existing Hindu structure. In fact, the best he suggested was that
in some temples the untouchables could go during fixed hours only, and thereafter the temple could formally
be purified by the prescribed method for undoing the pollution or defilement caused by the visit of low
castes.'8 The second major organisational step the Third Guru took was the creation of 22 districts for
preaching Sikhism and administering and organising the Sikh society. The area covered was almost from
Kabul to the East of India. The number of districts was the same as the number of political provinces in the
country. These districts catered to the religious as well as temporal needs of the Sikh society. Sikhs, women
as well as men, were appointed to head these districts. It is also reported that for the first time separate
organisations called pirhis of women were also created, which were headed by women only. Third, in order to
establish separate indentity of the Sikh society, to create a consciousness about their independent social
standing, and to dissociate the Sikhs from the Hindu practices and places of pilgrimage, he created a banii at
Goindwal as an alternate place for the biannual religious visits, gatherings, education and regeneration of the
Sikhs. In short, by this time the Sikh society had reached a new stage of awareness not only of their
ideological identity, but also of their distinctive role as a cohesive social group. They developed motivations
to achieve the new goals set for them. The ministry of the Fourth Guru lasted only for seven years. But he,
too, made the momentous decision of founding Amritsar as the sacred centre of the new community and
developing it as a new township, which has since then played a crucial role in Sikh history. It has become the
Vatican of the Sikhs, and, in fact, their throbbing heart. The history of the Guru period and the subsequent
periods shows that enemies of the Sikhs have always believed that subduing Amritsar would mean the decline
of Sikhs and their ethos.
2.4 The role of the Fifth Guru is extremely important as the leader of a miri-piri society. The earlier
Gurus had created a formal and well-knit organisation socially and religiously cohesive and ideologically
committed. Guru Arjun also accomplished the momentous work of compiling and authenticating the Sikh
Scripture, thereby making the ideological break with the traditional form of Indian society complete. It is in
his time that the Sikh society was taken by his contemporaries and historians to be a ‘state within a state’,!? in
which the Guru was formally taken by the Sikhs to be the real emperor or the sacha patshah of piri and miri.
He was the first Guru to introduce the system of daswandb, namely, that every Sikh contributed a tithe or one
tenth of his earnings towards the cause of the society. In fact, nothing could be more regal than the
introduction of this collection and reorganising the system of manjis and masands. They were not only
supposed to make collections for the Centre, but also to cater to the spiritual and temporal needs of the local
Sikh society. In fact, the Fifth Guru openly and visibly created a socio-religious organisation, which, if seen in
the background of the religious history of man, finds hardly a parallel. Neither Buddha nor Lord Mahavira,
nor Moses, nor Christ created a comparable organisation of the size and structure developed by the Fifth
Guru. As we have said, the work of | motivation and conditioning had continuously been done to give the
Sikhs their cohesion and direction. It is at this stage, that the Fifth Guru with his supreme vision took some
other organisational steps. He finalised the Sikh Centre and the town of Amritsar. He created a similar town
and gurdwara with a large tank at Tarn Taran in the heart of the Majha area. The Guru constructed a number
of tanks at other places, too, as public works, because in those days Punjab suffered from scarcity of rains,
and famine conditions frequently prevailed. He dug a tank at Santokhsar by raising contributions from far
and near. The Amritsar tank was widened and deepened. The Guru dug another tank called Gangsar and
started the township at Kartarpur. A bai was also constructed at Lahore. Similarly he dug a well which
could feed six Persian wheels, the place being called Chheharta on this account. Not only that, the Guru
persuaded Emperor Akbar, when he visited him to remit or reduce the revenue demand as relief to the
famished peasants of the area. The significant point is the distinct measures taken by the Gurus to relieve the
sufferings of the people during the time of famine and distress.2° Further, providing free food at every Sikh
Centre has, since Guru Nanak, always been a Sikh social practice. And the steps which the Guru took were
exactly those which any good administration would take to relieve the sufferings of the people. All we seek
to stress is that in the Sikh concept of mir7-piri, adequate care of temporal needs of the people is also
necessary. Otherwise, few religious leaders have undertaken such large scale construction of townships and
tanks for water supply. Mohsin Fani who was a contemporary of the Guru, recalls that in the time of the
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Fifth Guru there was tremendous increase in the number of Sikhs all over, and that in most of the towns of
the entire country, Sikhs were definitely found. Gupta, the distinguished historian writes that the Guru
advocated spiritual life and worldly living as two aspects of a single reality.2!_ In fact, Mohsin Fani reports
that ‘the Sikhs had already become accustomed to a form of self-government within the Empire.’ The belief
that the world was maya, had no place in the Sikh thought and society.22 The Guru erected lofty buildings at
Amritsar, procured horses from Central Asia, kept elephants and engaged retainers for them.”> It is his
temporal status that induced a senior functionary of the Mughal Administration to offer the hand of his
daughter to the Guru’s son, Hargobind.
2.5 Another important fact which portends the coming events, is the Guru’s inducements to the
Sikhs to enter trading in horses from Central Asia. This trading he did himself, and encouraged his Sikhs to
follow it. The step had evidently profound meanings. It suggested that the Guru had a clear vision of the
future role of the Sikh Society in which both training in horse-riding and procurement and supply of horses
would be necessary. It is well-known that earlier the Sikhs were mostly either petty traders, peasants or small
functionaries. This distinct turn to a new profession given by the Guru himself, is meaningfully suggestive of
the coming confrontation with the Empire of the day. Lastly, another great act of the vision of the Guru is
that after having made his assessment, he initiated a new period of Sikh history. For, he felt that from the
point of view of organisation, motivation and size of the community, it was ready for the struggle ahead. The
important fact is that the landmark of that struggle was created by the Fifth Guru with his own martyrdom.
2.6 Jehangir came to the throne at Delhi, Khusro, his brother, who was considered to be of better
temperament, training and aptitude, rebelled against Jehangir. His army did not make much headway, and he
retreated to reorganise towards Lahore. There was a meeting between Khusro and the Guru. The Prince
sought help and blessings, and both were given. Beni Parsad in his Hastory of Jehangir records that the Guru
gave Rs. 5,000/- to the Prince as help for his journey and the army.”* Seen in the existing context the
monetary help was very sizeable. The significance of the step, while it was never lost on Emperor Jehangir,
has so often been missed by some historians. It is unthinkable that the Guru did not realise what would be
the implications of this step, as naturally understood and actually interpretted by Jehangir. Another
significant fact is that whereas the Guru gave such a large sum to the rebel Prince from the common treasury
of the Guru, he refused to give even a penny from it by way of fine to save his own life, when it was imposed
on him by the Emperor. In fact, he forbade even the Sikhs to make the payment to save his life. It is
extremely meaningful to understand that while he considered the five thousand Rupees he gave to Khusro to
have been well spent, he would not give even a penny for his own self. It is, therefore, naive on the part of
some historians either to misunderstand or to minimise the implications of a step, the meanings of which
were clear to Jehangir. The Emperor in his autobiography distinctly expressed his ire at the event, and
recotded that Sikhism was certainly a growth which he wanted to nip in the bud. Few Emperors are
concerned with quietist saints, and Mughal Emperors were always fond of Sufi Pzrs and sought their blessings.
Jehangir’s going out of the way to punish the Guru and, for that matter the growing Sikh society, was a
distinct measure to curb the evident political potentials of the Sikh society. It is also evident that Sheikh
Ahmed Sirhindi, the head of the Naqshabandi Order, a revivalist of Islamic orthodoxy, who was in a position
to judge the growing influence and expansion of the Sikh society, urged the Emperor to curb the
development of the Sikh society in the area.2° That a heavy fine was imposed on the Guru, is testified by
Mohsin Fani who records that Guru Hargobind was sent to Gwalior as a prisoner for his father’s non-
payment of the fine imposed on him.”” Before his execution Guru Arjun sent a message to his son that the
time for starting open military preparations had come and that he should do so. Here it is significant to state
that in the time of the Fifth Guru, Guru Hargobind as a boy had been joining hunting parties involving
requisite use of arms.
2.7 Beni Parsad, the renowned historian of Jehangir, declares that Guru Arjun’s was a political
execution.*® The events of the time of the Fifth Guru, and the positive steps and the tangible measures he
took, make it plain that Guru Arjun raised a visible structure on the wz-piri foundations laid by Guru Nanak,
and that the Sixth Guru only continued further development thereof. As stated earlier, the conditioning and
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
motivation about the socio-political and ideological independence of the Sikhs, had been developed by the
first four Gurus. What is of profound significance is that Guru Arjun started the next stage in the growth of
the Sikh society, and by his confrontation and martyrdom, he strengthened the faith, determination and
cohesion of the Sikhs for the struggle ahead.
2.8 From the time of the Sixth Guru the mri-piri complexion of the Sikh society became visible and
tangibly clear. On the very first day of his Guruship the Sixth Guru used two swords as symbol of the mr7-
piri aspect of the Sikh society. The very significant fact is that in Sikh symbolism even for the pir, sword is
the necessary insignia and not a rosary. For, it clearly defines and stresses that in Sikh ideology mri is an
essential component of the Sikh spiritual system, and not that two separate concepts have been combined.
The Sixth Guru took a number of positive steps in the m7-piri development of the Sikh society. Evidently, in
the initial stages he could not find men from among the Sikhs to impart training in the military arts. He,
therefore, recruited mercenaries for the purpose. His two other steps were the construction of the Akal
Takht with an additional flag on the premises of Harimandar Sahib, showing thereby that, whereas the
activities appeared to be different, their integral fusion as a common source was essential. He also built a
regular fort at Amritsar.
2.9 As stated above, the Guru was imprisoned at Gwalior for his father not having paid the fine
imposed on him. He was later released, but he continued with his military preparations and ventures.
Henceforward, he instructed his Sikhs to don a sword and keep horses. He partook in hunting parties, and
he gave, as before, full freedom for use of non-vegetarian diet. The Sikhs, as reported by historian Gupta,
squarely established themselves as ‘a state within a state.’ Necessary recruitment of soldiers was done, and
requisite wherewithals for an army were created. The first opportunity for a significant military venture of the
Guru came soon after his release from Gwalior, when he helped Dharam Chand, a Prince of the Nalagarh
Hindu state to regain his throne.
2.10 Before we go to the other military encounters of the Guru, let us record a clarification given by
the Guru himself about the ideology of Guru Nanak. Goswami Ramdas, a saint from Maharashtra, happened
to meet Guru Hargobind and expressed his surprise as to how he, who was riding a horse, keeping an army
and wearing a soldier’s garb, could be a sadhu or a good successor to Guru Nanak. Guru Hargobind’s reply
was clear and categoric, saying that Guru Nanak had never renounced the world, and that his sword was to
protect the poor and to destroy the tyrant.” The importance of this statement is that it is an authentic
elucidation of Guru Nanak’s thesis and spiritual man’s responsibility in the field of injustice and oppression,
as laid down by the First Guru, and as understood by his spiritual successor. In fact, it is a reiteration of what
Guru Nanak had himself laid down in his hymns. Here again it needs to be stressed that Guru Hargobind’s
understanding of Sikhism as defined by Guru Nanak, is perfectly authentic. For, it is Guru Nanak who in his
hymns describes God as ‘the Destroyer of the evil’, ‘the Saviour of Saints’, ‘the Slayer of the inimical’ and ‘an
Annihilator of the demonical.”° As we are aware, the Naths were also surprised at the spiritual role of Guru
Nanak, while he continued to wear the garb of a householder. Persons brought up in the Indian tradition like
Sant Ramdas of Maharashtra, always express their surprise at the mri-piri thesis of Guru Nanak. Guru
Hargobind started military preparations in right earnest. Mercenaries were employed and thousands of Sikhs
trained as soldiers. On the basis of the organisational steps taken by the earlier Gurus, a sizeable and an
independent socio-political system had been created. Gupta writes : “The Sikhs came to occupy a kind of
separate state within the Mughal state, the position of which was securely established by the fiscal policy of
Guru Amar Das and Guru Arjun and his armed system.”3!
2.11 It is in this context that the confrontation with the Empire, initiated by the Fifth Guru, was
continued, and six battles with the Empire were fought by the Sixth Guru. The battle of Jallo clearly suggests
the climate and approach in the Sikh society towards the Empire. Jadunath Sircar writes that during a hunt
the Sikhs clashed with the Imperial Forces about the possession of a falcon claimed by them “and that in the
end Imperialists were beaten off with slaughter.” The Sikhs declined to return the bird, because according
to the rules of the game, it had legitimately come into their possession. The important fact is that they
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
refused to accept the claim, or superiority of the claim of the Imperial troops on the basis of their soverignty.
It is a clear case where Sikhs, because of their own sense of political independence, declined to accept the
sovereignty of the Mughal Administration. Two statements are significantly indicative of the Sikh self-
understanding of their stand and their socio-political status. A contemporary of Guru Gobind Singh,
Konkan, later wrote about this incident saying that the Imperialists were claiming the bird (ba), but that they
should forget about it, since the Sikhs were out to have the crown (/#) also from them (the Mughals).
Another writer reports that this statement about snatching the crown was made by the Guru himself, when a
Muslim tried to intercede and suggested to the Sixth Guru that he would have the matter settled and the issue
closed.** The incident and the consequent battle at Jallo are very significant of the politico-military defiance
of the Guru. He not only refused to accept Mughal hegemony, but also openly started to prepare his people
for clash with the Empire.
2.12 Later, more battles with the Mughal Forces from Lahore and Delhi, were fought by the Guru.
According to Mohammad Latif, Mukhlis Khan who attacked at the head of 7,000 troops, was repulsed,
defeated and killed. It is during this period that the town of Sri Hargobindpur sprang up, where the Guru
built a mosque, evidently for his Muslim subjects and soldiers to offer their prayers. As in the case of the
falcon, the Guru sent Bidhi Chand to recover his horses wrongly appropriated by the Mughal Governor. On
this the Governor Khalil Begh mounted an attack on the Guru. The Governor was defeated.** Another
major battle with the Imperial Forces took place at Gurusar near Lakhi jungle, between Ferozepur and
Bhatinda. In this battle alone, which the Guru won, 1,200 Sikhs lost their lives*5 In view of these
continuous clashes with the Imperial Forces the Guru selected a site in the hilly area of Kehloor state and
settled there.
2.13 From the history of the times Gupta clearly concludes : “After 600 years of slavery he (the
Guru) was awakening his fellow contrymen to the realisation that, irrespective of consequences, which were
quite obvious, the people should rise against a cruel government to get their wrongs redressed.” “Guru
Hargobind had a clear conception of the changing circumstances and had realised the necessity of playing an
active role in the political life of the community.” “He certainly inaugurated a policy which was to lead the
most downtrodden people slowly but assuredly to political and military advancement. The Guru created a
revolution in the life of the Sikhs. Along with recitation of hymns they were taught the practical lesson of
dharamyudba ot holy war.” “In reality Guru Hargobind rendered a unique service to this country in showing
the true path of deliverance from political bondage.”*°
2.14 The large scale military preparations and organisation he created, his battles with the Mughal
Forces, and, what is more important, the thought of political independence or sovereignty he promoted in the
Sikh society, especially in the context of the Akal Takht, and the independent standard he raised at
Harimandar Sahib, make it abundantly clear, that the Guru visibly and calculatedly furthered, both in theory
and in practice, the mri-piri concept of Guru Nanak. But, as historians have recorded, he could do so only
because of the foundations laid, conditioning done, and structures built already by the earlier Gurus. This
preliminary work of motivation and education of the Sikh society was very essential. Because in the over
2,000 year old Indian tradition ahimsa, withdrawal, monasticism and celibacy had been established and
accepted as basic religious values. It was, therefore, a colossal task indeed to discard them and make people
accept, and make sacrifices for, the idea that it is the spiritual man’s responsibility to undo injustice and
oppression even in the political field.
2.15 The Seventh Guru maintained an army and continued military preparations. When the struggle
for succession between Aurangzeb and Dara Shikoh started, the latter gathered his force for the contest.
Dara who was considered to be a person of liberal and tolerant views, called upon persons who were likely to
support him. Dara was defeated by Aurangzeb, and he retreated to Punjab, the area of his Viceroyalty. The
Guru met him at the head of a few thousand Sikh troops, and offered help. Dara, however, it seems, was
demoralised and despaired of his success, and gave up the contest.37 But Aurangzeb, like Jehangir, never
forgot the offer of help made by the Guru to Dara. It is significant that the Guru took a positive and
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
voluntary step, when he knew full well that it was a contest for royalty, and as to what had been the result of a
similar assistance rendered by his grandfather to Khusro, the then contestant for the throne. Yes, it is evident
that the Guru did so in full consciousness of the likely consequences of the offer. And this could never have
been done, if the Guru had eschewed political objectives. It is important to note that invariably the Gurus
sided with the political party that in comparative terms stood for some semblance of fairness and tolerance.
2.16 As soon as Aurangzeb was secure at his throne, he called Guru Har Rai to Delhi. The latter
sent his son Ram Rai. It is then that Ram Rai wrongly quoted a hymn from Adi Granth to the Emperor, and
the Guru discarded him for ever. Later, Guru Har Rai passed away in 1661. Similarly, the Eighth Guru was
also sent for by the Emperor. But before any meeting between the Guru and Aurangzeb could take place, the
Guru passed away, while still at Delhi. The period of the Ninth Guru is very eventful. Aurangzeb intensified
his bigoted activities of intolerance against non-Muslims. Large scale demolition of Hindu temples, execution
of opponents and conversion of Hindus to Islam, particularly in Kashmir, took place.** Two facts about the
period of the Ninth Guru are important. The Emperor was informed that the Ninth Guru was creating a
new nation with the object of a rebellion against the Empire. Thereafter, the Emperor conveyed a message
to the Guru that if he gave up his political activities, he would get Government grants for his prayers and
preachings.* The political implications of the rejection of this offer, were too obvious to the Guru, and yet
he did so. The Guru toured Punjab in order to relieve peoples’ suffering and raise their moral. In fact, when
the harassed Kashmiri Pundits approached him for advice and _ help, he gave them a solemn assurance.” The
subsequent story of his being called to Delhi, and of his execution is well-known. These two facts make it
plain that not only political objectives and help to the oppressed people were within the religious purview of
the Gurus’ system, but they actively, militarily and otherwise, always pursued those interests with a view to
confronting injustice and oppression. And for this purpose they staked everything and organised and led the
Panth to do so. The above is the story of Guru Har Rai and Guru Tegh Bahadur, allegedly pacificist Gurus,
who not only made military preparations, but distinctly and openly made political moves that provoked
intense hostility towards their persons and the Pan/h.
2.17 The pontificate of the Tenth Guru is a period of open, continuous and mounting military
activities and clash with the Empire, the Mughal Governors and their associate Hill Princes. In all he fought
about twenty battles involving the loss of thousands of his men, his four sons and his mother besides extreme
personal hardship and suffering. He accomplished in his lifetime the epitomic work of creating the Khalsa
and its organisation, with the clear objective of fighting injustice and oppression. This he declared in his
speech at the time. Facts and events clearly point to political objectives also, which were involved, because of
the oppressive Mughal policy of the period. The Guru built a sizeable military force, recruited mercenaries,
and invited the Hindu Hill Princes to join him in the struggle to overthrow the oppressive Empire. Because
of the liberating policies of the Sikh Panth, the caste-ridden Hindu Princes not only declined to side with
him,*! but also invited and fought on the side of the Mughal armies against him. That the objectives of the
Guru were religious and just, is clear from the fact that a Muslim P7r, Budhu Shah, sided and fought on his
side, involving the loss of his two sons and hundreds of his Muslim followers.*2 This marvellous event makes
it glaringly clear that, while the struggle of the Guru was political, it was considered by all good persons just
and fair, and in the interest of the people as a whole.
2.18 Even after the demise of Aurangzeb, the Guru did try to help Bahadur Shah, on an
understanding that he would prove a fair ruler. But when the Emperor’s conduct belied his hopes, he
deputed Banda for the expedition in Punjab. He gave his blessings to Banda Bahadur, sent five of his trusted
Sikhs as Advisors with him,*? and issued messages and directions to the Sikhs in the state to support the
revolution. The significant fact is that the Guru’s attack was against the Mughal Administration, and not
against any particular person. The Guru’s disappointment was with the Emperor, who according to historian
Gupta, had been playing a double and deceptive game and was involved in the murderous attack on the
Guru. For, he clearly felt that the Guru’s move of sending Banda and his army to the North was an assault
against the Empire. Significantly, for seven weeks the Emperor did not shift his headquarters from Nanded
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
further down, to subdue his brother, until the demise of the Guru, an event which, he felt, would frustrate the
Sikh attack, and enable him to safely continue his march to the South.*
2.19 The political objectives of the Guru are also evident from the statement of his spouse, Mata
Sundti, when she stated that the Guru had bestowed passhahi (sovereignty and rule) upon the Panth, and that
Banda had only been entrusted with the task of doing this service to the Panth. (Bande ko khijmat dei, dei
patshahi nabi; Dei patshabi panth nij ap sache patshabi).© "This makes the objective of sending Banda, his advisors
and army to the Punjab very explicit. This is also supported by Bhai Nandlal’s record of thd Guru’s emphatic
statement in his Tankhahnamabh, saying, “Listen, Nandlal, to this truth. I shall clearly manifest self-rule of
sovereignty.’ It is significant that after the success of Banda in the Punjab and his declaration of self-rule
there was no difference of opinion or policy as between Banda and his deputed advisors and Sikhs. The
differences arose only when Banda was considered to have departed from Sikh practices, meaning thereby
that whereas establishment of self-rule was a part of the Guru’s mandate and within the ambit of his policy, it
is Banda’s supposed departure from Sikh practices that led to the schism.
2.20 The above is a brief record of the miri-piri development in Siklhism in the Guru period. But
the most important fact is the insignia the Tenth Guru finally prescribed for every amritdhari Sikh as an
essential part of his wear. The &éirpan constantly reminds the Sikhs of three things. First, of his
responsibilities to confront injustice and oppression in the political field, both as an individual and as a
member of the Sikh society. Second, that use of force, to the extent necessary, is permitted. The third
reminder is equally significant, namely, that the Sikh society should never shirk its socio-political
responsibilities, nor decline into monasticism, withdrawal or asceticism. The prescribing of this insignia,
virtually a hukamnama (command) by the Guru is indeed an act of deep historical insight and vision. For, it
has been a historical experience that religious societies that started with clearly accepted socio-political
responsibilities, later in their leaner periods, declined into pacificism, withdrawal and monasticism, forgetting
their social responsibilities. And, it is this responsibility that Guru Nanak emphasised while taking to the life
of a householder, and combining spiritual life and empirical life.
III. GURU PERIOD : AN OVERALL LOOK FROM THE MIRI-PIRI ANGLE
3.1 Let us have a look at the Guru period from the angle of miri-piri concept the Gurus introduced.
Earlier in India religion unmistakably involved withdrawal, sanyasa, ascetic practices, abimsa, celibacy, and the
consequent downgrading of women and householder’s life. Guru Nanak’s colossal task was to change this
over-2000-years-old religious tradition. He could very well have been misunderstood, if he had started
abruptly, crudely or just theoretically. The primary question which the Naths raised with the Guru, was as to
how he claimed to be leading a religious life, while retaining the garb of a householder. Such die-hard
prejudices and practices could not be removed overnight. Guru Nanak spent almost a whole life time,
preaching far and wide the essentials of his system. Hardly any religious leader of his or earlier times travelled
so extensively. Yet, he also laid the firm foundations both of its entire theory in his hymns and of its
structural and organisational framework on the ground. People had to be weaned away from their old ideas
and habits. The basic task was not only to create a new ethos, but also to convince the people that the path
he led was indeed spiritual in its true sense. Accordingly, in the time of the first four Gurus, the emphasis
was on conditioning and education of the Sikh society in the new mission and goals.
3.2 The period of the Fifth Guru is clearly the one when the march on the highway of the mir-piri
course became visible. Muslim contemporaries like Mohsin developed a political potential, and posed a
serious threat to the Imperial policies. For, the Fifth Guru started collection of daswandb and used it for
political organisation and objectives. The Fifth Guru’s periodical Sikh gatherings were considered regal in
their size and operation. He initiated confrontation with Delhi, and by his martyrdom reinforced the will of
the Sikh society to struggle and sacrifice. The Sixth Guru’s militancy and battles were open enough. The
Seventh Guru never faltered when the opportunity came to offer help to Dara, nor did the Ninth Guru give
up his military and political activities, even when the Imperial offer came and the risk in declining it was
evident. Each time the road to martyrdom was chosen voluntarily. The Tenth Guru not only made his
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
military confrontation open and continuous, but he also made two monumental landmarks. By his amrit
system he finalised the structural framework of the Panth, ensuring that it would not slip back into withdrawal
and pacificism. Second, by his dispatch of Banda expedition to Punjab, he finally mounted a full-fledged
assault on the Empire.
3.3 Yet, how difficult it is for persons with a pacificist religious background, or bent of mind, to
accept the ideology of Guru Nanak, is evident from the fact that not only Naths and Sant Ram Das, but even
today persons given to the pacificist or soft life of the time, or impervious to poverty and distress, are
disinclined to accept the bold w-piri logic of the Gurus. On the other hand, the Gurus have been very
outspoken and clear about it. Guru Nanak emphasises that the only path of spirituality was the one of love
and, if once chosen, one should waver not. The same is the clear message the Fifth Guru gave to Bhai Manjh,
when he asked him if he should follow Sakhi Sarvar or be a Sikh of the Guru. The Guru replied that he better
continue with the soft life of a Sakhi Sarvaria, because as a Sikh his whole wealth and life would be at stake.4”
And, exactly the same message was given, and the undertaking obtained, when the Tenth Guru administered
amrit to the Five Beloved Ones or Péaras. In each case the path was of love, and the commitment demanded
was total. And what total commitment means, has been amply demonstrated by the Gurus themselves in
their sacrifices, deeds and martyrdoms, which hardly have a parallel in human history. It is just naive to say
that the last over 140 years of the Guru period were just incidental or accidental. In fact, they record the
most indelible imprints of the Guru period and an incontrovertible interpretation of the Sikh thesis which
Guru Nanak had completely embodied in his hymns and the Fifth Guru had finally compiled in the Adi
Granth in 1604 A.D. The subsequent tempestuous 104 years of the lives of the Gurus, which were full of
sufferings, and creation of the Khasla, become evidently incongruous, if any other interpretation of the Sikh
thesis is suggested.
IV. SOME CRITICISMS ANSWERED
4.1 There have been a number of criticisms of the historical view presented in this essay. A major
criticism, mostly from scholars with a pacificist or dichotomous religious background, is that a doctrine of
love of God cannot be reconciled with the use of force or war. This mental inhibition is understandable from
votaries of dichotomous or pacificist religions. Jadunath Sircar, Mahatma Gandhi and Tagore have been
critical of the role of the Tenth Guru. Similarly, Toynbee frowns upon the work of Prophet Mohammed for
his militancy. These scholars ignore that actually it is the doctrine of love that provides the compulsion to
confront injustice. Evil is a fact of life. The question is how to undo it, and who is responsible for doing so.
In a whole-life religion the answer is clear. Since God is himself the Destroyer of the evil and the demonical,
the seeker, as His instrument, must make every effort to fight oppression, as a religious responsibility.
Injustice, as is well-known, is greatest in the political field. The man of religion, imbued with love, cannot
remain indifferent or step aside, when injustice is done within his social sphere. The next issue is whether
that confrontation should remain confined to the use of pacificist means only or should include resort to the
use of force as well. The twentieth century has made the answer to this question quite clear. After the start
of the Second World War, votaries of pacificism sought the advice of Mahatma Gandhi, the apostle of non-
violence. But he had no answer and felt so frustrated and baffled, that he even thought of committing
suicide.*8 Later he himself suggested participation in war for the Allies, in case Britain agreed to grant
autonomy to India.*? It is also well-known that after 1947 he blessed the dispatch of Indian forces to
Kashmir to repel Pakistan-backed intrusion by tribals. H. M. Seervai, the greatest constitutional lawyer of
India, concludes, “There is little doubt that Gandhi used non-violence as a political weapon, and was
prepared to support or connive at violence to secure political goals.”5° Bertrand Russell has been another
known pacificist who even suffered imprisonment for his views during the First World War. But after the
Second World War the same Russell suggested that in order to avoid the appalling disaster of a possible
Russian victory, threat of force, or even the actual use of force, should be employed against the U'S.S.R.,
before it could develop a big stockpile of atom bombs, and become a threat to the West.5! In short, this
shows the bankruptcy of pacificism in human affairs, if injustice and oppression have to be confronted.
Pacificism is all right where the objective is individual salvation, and goes well with all systems of withdrawal.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
4.2 Some scholars are fond of quoting the hymn of the Guru, “Rayna chahon mukt na chahon man preet
charan kamlare.’ (nvariably the meanings and message of the hymn ate distorted. What is rejected are power,
pelf and the pride and the glamour thereof. Guru Nanak declared that Sikhism is a path of love, and the
Gurus for over hundred years waged a war against oppression and the intolerant state, involving death of
thousands of Sikhs and their own martyrdoms. They were certainly following the compulsions of the path
of love. Bergson has clearly stated that in the case of a mystic of activity, his love of God is transformed into
God’s love for all men? It is the love of God and man both that compels the gurmukh to fight for a
righteous cause. Similarly, the story of Abu Ben Adam demonstrates that in God’s system the love of man is
synonymous with his love for God. True, scholars from pacificist religions have their own compulsions.
But, as stated above, love of man, help to a neighbour under attack, and confrontation with evil on the one
hand, and pacificism, in the face of injustice or oppression, on the other hand, are a contradiction, and cannot
often go together. It is also incongruous to suggest that this interpretation of the hymn, while it can justify
struggle with oppression, means that after the oppressor is eliminated, the religious man should withdraw
from the field and leave another ~anmukh to occupy the seat of power. The history of the Guru period does
not suggest any such withdrawal from social responsibility. In fact, during the last hundred years the Sikh
Gurus not only were administering large scale economic and socio- political organisations, and punishing
wrong-doers, like masands, but were undertaking every kind of social responsibility almost impossible to
discharge in a lifetime.
4.3 Another ideological objection that has been raised is the couplet in Bachitar Natak ‘Babeke
Babarke Dou, ap Rare parmesar sou, Deen Sah inko pehchano, duni pat unko anmano. "This is interpreted as the Guru
virtually saying, “Render unto Caeser what is Caeset’s.” First, as in known, the authenticity of the verses is in
doubt. It is unbelievable that the Tenth Guru who all his life confronted the Mughal Administration, fought
twenty battles, invited the Hindu Hill Princes to join his struggle to supplant the intolerant rule of Aurangzeb,
and dispatched Banda to Punjab, could ever write such a couplet conceding temporal authority to him.
Second, even the interpretation and translation of the words as explained by Kapur Singh and Jagjit Singh,%
have been incorrectly done. The couplet is just a factual statement that both the house of Babar and the
house of the Guru are the creation of God. There is nothing in it to suggest that the Guru directed the Sikhs
to recognise the house of Babar as such, while all his life he himself had been fighting that house. It is just a
couplet to mean the omnipotence of God as the Creator of everything. The translation of the word ‘pebchano’
to mean ‘recognise’ is obviously incorrect. The word means only a statement of the position of the two
houses as it was, and does not at all imply any recognition thereof.
4.4 It has also been suggested that the Guru sent Banda with the Advisors and the Sikh Army only
to negotiate with or to subdue and punish Wazir Khan, Governor of Sirhind. The suggestion is a bit naive.
Sending the army with Banda and messages to the Sikhs to rally round him, can hardly be considered
consistent with Banda’s role as a negotiator. The Guru had himself tried to negotiate with Bahadur Shah,
who alone was in a position to make a settlement, and had come to the conclusion that he was not inclined to
do so. The circumstances following the negotiations and the step taken by the Guru are clearly indicative of
their failure. On his part the Guru sent Banda to launch the attack in Punjab. Bahadur Shah obviously,
resented the Guru’s move and deceptively tried to send the Pathans to assassinate the Guru.*4 It is just
absurd to suggest that Wazir Khan was in a position to negotiate anything, or that, if subdued or destroyed,
the Emperor would remain unconcerned; or that Banda or the Guru would later take orders from Bahadur
Shah to appoint a new Governor of Sirhind after Wazir Khan’s elimination. Hence, as also confirmed by
Mara Sundri, Banda had been deputed to establish the Ra of the Panth.
4.5 It has also been suggested that although the Gurus kept armies, and fought battles for over
hundred years, they never carved out any area for themselves, and had no political consideration in view. The
suggestion appears quite meaningless. The entire Punjab was under Mughal rule. The question of carving
out a principality for the Guru could arise either by supplanting the Mughal rule or by accepting their
suzerainty. The question of the second possibility could not arise, and it is to undo the unjust, intolerant and
oppressive Mughal rule, that the Gurus had been fighting throughout.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
4.6 Another scholar has argued that the use of force permitted by the Guru is only for the purpose
of defence. Confusion about the meaning of defence in human and military affairs is common. The basic
question is about oppression and injustice, and how to undo them. What has to be defendend is peace,
freedom and justice. Thus, military activity of every kind in support of justice is defence. As such, the
question of defence or offence is irrelevant, the form of operation being just a matter of strategy. The
maintenance of thousands of soldiers, including employment of mercenaries, waging of scores of wars by the
Gurus, and the dispatch of Banda to Punjab from Nanded can in the common terminology hardly be called
defensive, except in the sense that all such operations were in defence of righteousness. It can never be
suggested that the Gurus waged the wats and made the attacks to save their person of property. It is simply
unthinkable that the Gurus kept army just for any personal or parochial purpose and not to secure justice and
peace for the people, and to save them from oppression or conversion, as had been explained by the Sixth
Guru to Sant Ram Das.
4.7 It has also been argued that as Guru Granth Sahib never lays down any rules for civil or political
administrator like Sarat in Islam, it means that the Gurus never contemplated any political role for the Sikhs.
The argument is far from sound. As noted already, the Gurus themselves had been creating and managing
large scale socio-political organisations and armies. That they conducted their administration with love and
justice, is evident from the extreme devotion they inspired from the Sikh as well as non-Sikh forces. It is this
sense of fairness and spiritual purity in their conduct and objectives that led Budhu Shah to join the Guru’s
forces, involving the loss of his sons and men. The second part of the issue is that civil rules and practices
are always dated, and never universal or eternal. These demand adjustment to ever changing socio-economic
conditions. Therefore, for a spiritual man to prescribe rules of civil life can, quite often, become an
embrassing handicap for his followers. We are well aware that rules of the Sariat and similar practices that
had been laid down in Judaism and Islam, both whole-life religions, have sometimes become a limitation or
incongruous in changed circumstances. It shows, indeed, the vision and wisdom of the Gurus that while they
clearly laid down basic principles of ethics and morality to be followed by the Sikh society, they avoided
laying down civil rules that could in the course of time become restrictive or a hurdle.
4.8 In modern times persons with background of social sciences are very fond of suggesting
environmental or social factors as the cause of religious or historical developments. It has been argued that
since Jats of the area became followers of the Guru, and since Jat are known for a militant temperament, it is
concluded that militancy in the Sikh society was the result of their infiltration in the Sikh ranks. Jagjit Singh
in his book The Sikh Revolution has dealt with the subject at length, and exploded the entire basis of this
argument.>> Factually the position was that at the time Guru Hargobind took to militancy, the Jats were in a
minority in the Sikh society. Among the prominent Sikhs listed by Bhai Gurdas, the Jats formed a small
fraction.>® It is well-known that Baba Budha, a Ja/, and Bhai Gurdas, the two topmost Sikhs, remonstrated
with the mother of the Guru to dissuade him from the risky path. But since in the Sikh society final decisions
had to be made by the Guru, he not only continued with his policy, but what is most significant, he even
recruited numerous Muslim mercenaries to train the Sikhs in military arts. In fact, the adversaries of the
Guru ridiculed the strength of the Guru’s army, because most of its constituents belonged to low castes
despised by the Muslim adversaries who were proud of their own race and competence in the art of war and
militancy.*’ It is understandable that later the Jats joined the Sikh fold because of the military needs and
leadership of the Gurus. It is, thus, ridiculous to suggest that the Gurus took to militancy because of Jat entry
among the Sikhs. The fact is that, the Guru had to employ mercenaries, because of paucity of available
recruits in his own ranks.
4.9 Social science scholars also sometimes give syncretic explanation of militancy is Sikhism. For,
they are disinclined to accept ideological reasons for it. The syncretic explanation has been discussed and
discarded both by Jagjit Singh** and James Lewis.5° The suggestion is that the militancy was accepted
because of prevalence of Shaivism and Devi worship in the Hill areas or because of Islam. So far as Devi
worship in the Shivalik Hills is concerned, the argument has obviously no basis. Guru Hargobind raised his
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
army, fought all his six battles and built the Akal Takht and Lohgarh Fort at Amritsar in the Plains of Punjab,
long before he retreated to the Hills. And, Devi worship and Devi temples were too insignificant in the
plains of the Punjab so as in any way to influence the Guru or the Sikhs. In fact, because of the Sikh ideology
and their conditioning, the Sikhs had hardly any faith in the validity of Devi or Shiva worship. It is also well-
known that the Hindu Hill worshippers of the Devi declined to join the Guru in his struggle against the
Empire. Rather, they supported the Mughal forces against the Guru. Similarly, the influence of Islam is out
of question, because Sufism, the principal missionary wing of Islam, was itself non-militant and never raised
any voice, much less an organisation, to oppose the oppression of the Mughal Administration.
V. ACHIEVEMENTS OF MIRI-PIRISYSTEM
5.1 The achievements of Guru Nanak’s miri-piri system are in many human fields revolutionary,
monumental and abiding. Jagjit Singh in his three books, The Sikh Revolution, Perspectives on Sikh Studies, and In
the Caravan of Revolutions, has dealt with the subject at length, and shown that, although burdened with the
tradition of life-negating ideology and caste-ridden social structure and ethos of the Indian society, the Gurus
assiduously weaned away the Sikh society from it by creating among them a new set of values and goals.
5.2 Equality/Egalitarianism : First is the sense of equality and fraternity the Sikh Gurus brought
about in the social field. By the essential institution of /angar they broke all barriers and discriminations
arising from the caste ideology and the concept of pollution. In the Guru period and even later in the
eighteenth century, the elimination of all restrictions concerning commensality and social intercourse stood
removed. The supremacy of the two higher castes was completely rejected as also the stigma against the
lower castes concerning mobility of profession. Upto the eighteenth century there was hardly any prominent
Sikh leader except from the two lower castes, and Sikhs from the so-called higher castes willingly accepted
their leadership. The first Sikh leader who struck a coin was Jassa Singh, a Kalal considered to be a very low
Sudra subcaste, who never felt shy of proclaiming his caste on the coin he introduced. Even from the other
Sudra castes there were respected and distinguished leaders in the Sikh society, like Jiwan Singh and Jassa
Singh of Ramgarh. The lowest castes were recruited to the Sikh forces without any stigma or discrimination.
The self-respect of these lower castes was raised to a level that left no sense of inferiority vis-a-vis the higher
castes. It is by no means a small contrast that, unlike Hindus, the Sikhs have never been led by Brahmins
either in socio-political or intellectual fields.
5.3 Socialisation: The greatest measure of socialisation was the step Banda took after his victory,
namely, the distribution of land among the peasants and elimination of the zamindari and jagirdari systems. He
created a bold peasantry. It is this great step of socialisation which raised permanently the sense of self-
respect, self-confidence and self-reliance among the masses in the Sikh society. Neibuhr, the distinguished
Christian theologian of the century writes : “Because of evil in man and in society, Christian political action
called not simply for love, but for an attempt to give each group within society power to defend itself against
exploitation by other groups. Although relations between individuals might be a matter of ethics, relations
between groups were a matter of politics.’6 What the Christian theologian suggests as the necessary
corollary of love, was meaningfully done by the Sikh religion to check human tendency towards exploitation
and oppression of the poorer sections of society. Similarly, Jagjit Singh in his book In the Caravan of Revolutions
has stated that whereas the French Revolution never changed the class structure, nor raised the power or
social level of the lower strata, the Fourth Estate of the Christian society, and power continued to be in the
hands of the upper middle sections of the French society, it is only the Sikh religion that permanently broke
in the Punjab the social stratification in order to raise the level of the lowest classes in the social structure.“!
The status of women was improved, and they became leaders and heads of manjis and misls. In the history of
man such a large scale change in the social and power structure has hardly ever taken place. In fact, many of
the social and political developments and problems in the Punjab and the Sikh society, can be understood
only in the context of such achievements of the Sikh religion.
5.4. Earth Awareness: It is Guru Nanak, who condemned the idleness of the yogis, their vow to shun
economic activity, and the general habit of withdrawal. The Gurus by their ideology and personal example
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
and leadership, created the work and sustenance habit in the Sikh society, which has since then become its
established feature. Accordingly, in the Sikh society not to do any productive work or to live on begging is
considered parasitism and a stigma. It is this cultural trait that enables the Sikhs to adjust and live gainfully as
acceptable migrants in most foreign societies. It is because of their work habit and sense of adjustment,
innovation and pragmatism, that not only were they the first in the East to accept and adopt the wherewithal
of the Green Revolution, but today they regularly produce each year enough grain to contribute over 60% of
the food reserves procured by the India Government for distribution among deficit areas of the country.
5.5 Reaction Against Injustice And Oppression : Guru Nanak is the first man of God in India, who
introduced the concept of resistance against injustice as a moral value for a man of religion. It was by their
martyrdoms and leadership that Guru Nanak and his successors created, among a stagnant pool of
population, a new spirit, cohesion and zeal that enabled them to supplant in Punjab a mighty Empire, and to
stop once for all a thousand-year wave of invasions from the North-West of India. Individual leaders have
been galore in India and elsewhere, but rarely have the masses been fired with such a spirit for justice and
liberty, as was created by the Sikh Gurus. The marvellous work of Guru Gobind Singh against tyranny has
been epitomised in a single couplet of contemporary Sufi mystic Bulleh Shah, who sang his tribute to the
Tenth Guru, “I neither speak of the past, nor do I speak of the future, but I speak of the present : but for
Guru Gobind Singh, all the Hindus would have been circumcised 1.e. converted to Islam.”
5.6 Despite a price on each Sikh head, and repeated reports that all of them had been eliminated,
the Sikh masses rose, on the one hand, to uproot the oppressive administration in the area, and on the other
hand, to repel the invaders periodically swarming India, for loot and booty, from the North-West.
5.7 What is important is the acceptance in the society, of a new set of values, and to cultivate its
capacity to make sacrifices and suffer for the cause of justice. The role of the Sikh society in the fight for
liberty in the eighteenth century is well recognised. Their contribution to the cause of freedom is equally
outstanding in the 20th century. The first two rebellions against the British, the Kwka Rebellion and the
Ghadar Rebellion, were almost wholly manned by the Sikhs. While the Sikhs form only 2% of the Indian
population, during the struggle for Indian Independence, of the 121 persons hanged, 2,644 imprisoned for
life, and 1,330 massacred in the Jallianwala Bagh protest meeting, 93, 2,047 and 799, respectively, were Sikhs.
Again, of the soldiers who in the early forties, fought under Subhash Chandra Bose in the Indian National
Army, 60% were Sikhs. In 1975, when the Prime Minister, Indira Gandhi imposed the Emergency Law,
curtailing all human rights and liberties, the Sikhs were the only people who organised, sustained and
managed from the Golden Temple, Amritsar, a peaceful struggle against this invasion on all human freedoms.
It involved imprisonment of over 40,000 Sikhs, when in the rest of India, not even one third of that number
offered, as a protest, voluntary arrest. It is necessary to state that movements initiated by the Sikhs against
the state were executed from the precincts of Darbar Sahib, Akal Takht, wherefrom they drew their
inspiration and strength. It is regarding this struggle of the Sikhs that Ms. Vijayalakshmi Pandit, sister of
Jawaharlal Nehru, said, “Punjab which has always been in a forefront of resistance of oppression, kept its
colours flying, during the Emergency also. It was in Punjab and Punjab alone, that a large scale resistance was
organised against it. The worst thing that happened during the Emergency was that a brave nation was
frightened into submission, and nobody spoke, except in hushed tones. In Dehra Dun, where I was, I hung
my head in shame, and wondered, if this was the Bharat for which we, the freedom fighters, had suffered.
Even those, not actually in prison, were no less than in jail, Only in Punjab the Akalis organised a morcha
(protest) against this. Punjab’s lead in such matters should continue.’’
5.8 Sikh Ethos: A very important fact is the ethos the Sikh society and its leaders displayed, when
they were in power. Qazi Nur Mohammed, an official reporter who came with the invading armies of
General Abdali, reports that while the valour of the Sikh soldiers and their courage are undisputedly
outstanding what is extremely significant about the Sikhs is their conduct towards the vanquished. For, the
Sikh soldiers neither loot, nor fire upon or attack a fleeing soldier. In fact, the self-discipline and ethical
level of the victorious Sikh soldiers have not been achieved even in modern times.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
5.9 An equally significant fact is the magnanimity displayed by the Sikh Administration during the
time of Ranjit Singh. Even though Sikhs had suffered the severest persecution at the hands of the Muslim
Administration, in the 18th and early 19th centuries, the Sikh Rule never showed any discrimination for
recruitment in the army or civil administration against them. In fact, they enjoyed, both in the army and the
ministries, the highest and most trusted positions. It is, due to this unrivalled conduct of Ranjit Singh that in
the Anglo-Sikh Wars the Muslim soldiers fought the British with the same zeal as the Sikhs.
5.10 It was because of caste discrimination, acute caste consciousness, and professional immobility
that the contemporary Rajput and Mahratta rulers could never develop any sense of cohesion or nationalism
among their people as a whole. In these administrations, feudal and jagirdari systems continued, and caste
ideology and its exploitative and other manifestations were upheld. The social stratification was so strong
that a Rajput scorned to work on land, because if he did so, he was denigrated in social status. In
Maharashtra apart from the fact that the Ministers were Brahmins, there was prohibition against the entry of
untouchables on the roads during most of the day, lest their shadow should pollute the higher castes. It was
a standing state order that caste and Shastric regulations should be adhered to in the administration of justice
as between different sections of the people and that no innovation or departure should be made in their
enforcement.’ It is also well-known that pogroms against Jews and ghettos were a regular feature in
contemporary Christian states in Russia and Europe.
5.11 As against this, Ranjit Singh gave ample grants to Muslim and Hindu religious places, and there
were no communal tensions or clashes in his State. It is also significant to state that Ranjit Singh spent about
10% of his revenue for beneficent causes and religious grants.°° No attempt at religious conversions was evet
made. His beneficence went to the extent that he never gave a death sentence to anyone including those
guilty of attempts on his own life.”
5.12 What we seek to emphasise is that although change in ethical values of the masses is a very
slow process, especially in traditional cultures, it is in this field that the Sikh society showed a distinct and
radical change, both in its external and internal behavior, moral discipline, social conduct and sense of
responsibility for maintenance of human rights and justice, and towards other contemporary societies. The
important fact is that the change was significant at the mass level.
VI. CLASSIFICATION OF RELIGIONS
6.1 One of the major reasons for misunderstanding and misinterpretting Sikh ideology is the
ignorance of some scholars, especially those drawn from the field of social sciences, about the basic
classification of the religions of man. Broadly speaking, religions may be divided into two categories, namely,
life-negating, and life-affirming. In the case of life-negating religions, the world is deemed to be mithya (unreal
or an illusion) or a place of suffering, or man is considered an unwanted combination of the spiritual and the
empirical elements, which has to be disentangled. In all these cases the institutions of withdrawal, sanyasa,
asceticism, celibacy and the downgrading of women are ideologically accepted and recommended methods
for pursuing the spiritual path. In such religions, for that reason, monasticism, nunneries and pacificism
appeat. The salient fact displayed by the religious history of man is that practically all these institutions, and
values, being correlated, go together. The goal is personal salvation (woksha), union with or merger in the
Absolute, or an eternal life of the soul.
6.2 In the second category, evil in life is considered a problem, and the man of religion, while taking
full participation in life, seeks to battle with the forces of evil. In these cases God is considered to be
Altruistic and Immanent, and to have a Will directing the world. The goal of the man of religion is, thus, to
live and work as an instrument of God’s Will, and in that pursuit to accept total social responsibility. The
seekers are supposed to live the virtues described as attributes of God. They do not withdraw from, or reject
life or any part of it. For them life is a single whole, and cannot be compartmentalised. In these religions the
emphasis is on family life and social responsibility which includes confrontation with evil. As such, love,
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
moral life, freedom, justice, and equality of man, become primary values for the spiritual man, and
simultaneously, what is contrastingly significant, the institutions of withdrawal, sanyasa, celibacy, monasticism
and ahimsa are rejected.
6.3 Jainism and most other Indian systems are typical of the first category, in which the related
values and institutions mentioned above, are fully accepted. Once the seeker reaches the final stage of
spiritual goal, Ravilya, there is no return to life with which connection is permanently served. Similarly, the
videhi-mukta has no role to play in the world.” The important fact is that, except in the case of Sikhism, which
belongs to the other category, all these methods and values, accepted and used in the first category of
religions, have been an integral part of the Indian cultural and religious heritage for the last over 2,500 years.
6.4 Judaism, Islam and Sikhism belong to the other category. The revelation of God to Moses
straightaway directs him to make an attack on the land of Canaanites. Moses and his men were reluctant to
move, but God revealed, “My angel goes before you and brings you to Amarites, Hittites, Perizzites,
Canaanites, Hivites, and Jevusites, and I annihilate them.’”’”! “So God led the people roundabout by way of
the wilderness at the Sea of Reeds.” “The people may have a change of hearts, when they see war and return
to Egypt.”’? Further, the Law of Punishment revealed to Moses says, “The penalty shall be life for life, eye
for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, etc..”” The Torah, apart from
prescribing the rules of war and civil life, lays down the Ten ethical Commandments, as also regulations for
sacrifice and rituals. David and Solomon were celebrated kings of their times, and the Jewish prophets saw to
it that they worked according to the ethics prescribed in the Torah. The Torah is an integral part of the Bible.
The important fact is that the ethical commandments laid down over three millennia back embody certain
fundamental laws of morality, which are valid even today. In short, it is an ethically sound mii-piri system
that sanctions the use of force of war for a righteous cause, or for the purpose of God. It is obvious that
withdrawal, monasticism, celibacy, etc., are nowhere prescribed. Torah continues to be the spiritual guide of
the Jews, and from the time of Moses to the sixth century B.C., no variation was suggested by the prophets,
ot was practised.
6.5 It is for emphasis that every religious system has its logic and corollaries which lead to
congruous institutions and values. Another important fact is that in revelatory religions basic ideology is laid
down at the very start, and consequently, it is in the early part of the religion that foundations of the system
are laid and proclaimed. The history of Judaism and Islam makes this point very explicit. Further, all whole-
life religions accept the family system, and are social in their constitution and character. Being life-affirming,
the emphasis is on a life of love and virtue, and not on adopting ascetic practices, or creating monastic
institutions. Pacificism is rejected. Significantly, while the acceptance of certain values and institutions is
natural and necessary, simultaneously the rejection of contrary institutions is also considered equally natural
and desirable. An important corollary of the whole-life religions is the institution of martyrdom.
6.6 Here it is extremely necessary to understand that it is Guru Nanak who calls spiritual life a ‘game
of love’, organises a society, and rejects asceticism, withdrawal, celibacy and ahimsa. In fact, the words hukm
and raza meaning the Will of God, were taken by him from the Muslim terminology. Similarly, the Arabic
wotd shabid (martyr) in Sikhism had hardly an equivalent in the Indian languages, because withdrawal, sanyasa
and abimsa being celebrated religious institutions, the question of martyrdom could not arise. Whereas
quietist mystics or bhagats appeared in all ages and all countries, nowhere have they ever organised a society or
a people, because their objective invariable has been just personal salvation of a few. But, in contrast, Guru
Nanak is the first man of God in India to proclaim a new ideology, and create the entire structural framework
of his system in his own lifetime. At one stroke, and from the very start, he unmistakenly accepted and
implemented the elements of a whole-life or sir/-piri system, and rejected all the essentials of the earlier over
2,500-years-old dichotomous religious tradition. The contrast is that this old tradition, particularly its caste
system, the society is not willing to change even today. At the risk of alienating the entire Svdra population,
forming almost one fourth of India. Mahatma Gandhi stoutly stood for the maintenance of its discriminating
religious system of worship, and temple entry and management.” Social leaders like G. D. Birla and the
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
religious Shankracharyas justify it, and A. Coomaraswamy, the distinguished modern scholar, calls Manu Smriti
a book of Hindu Utopia.7> In this background, for Guru Nanak to reject the dichotomous Indian systems,
and instead, proclaim and practise a whole-life system, means two things. First, that his system, as asserted by
him, was the result of his revelation, since there was nothing in the social environment to influence him into
making the revolutionary change; second, that he introduced a full-blooded whole-life system, including
equality of man and woman, of which there was no trace in the then religious or cultural life of the world.
6.7 Among religions of man the above are the two principal kinds of religions that have appeared in
the East or the West. It is not suggested that there have not been intermediate or subsidiary and sectional
developments. The greatest proliferation of sects has been in India. But all of them have been dichotomous
and otherworldly, catering only for personal salvation. As concluded by Maitra in his Hindu Ethics, a common
feature of all Hindu systems and their doctrines of the ideal life is “the conception of the ideal as a negation
or at least as a transcendence of the empirical life proper and that this state is thus a super-moral spiritual
ideal rather than a strictly moral idea.””° “It is a transcendental state of deliverance from all struggles of
life
6.8 Christianity: In the Western world and the Middle East, Christianity is the third major religion.
It has a chequered history. While a whole-life system, it does present features like pacificism which normally
belong to the life-negating systems. It is, therefore, necessary to indicate a brief outline of developments in
that system. It is well-known that following the call of Jeremiah not to resist the Babylonian attack of the
sixth century B.C., many pacificist of monastic cults like Essenes, Kabbalists, etc., appeared in Judaism. It has
been suggested, on the basis of some Jewish manuscripts, including the Dead Sea Scrolls, that Jesus Christ
belonged to one of those pacificist groups. We do not contribute to this theory, but there is a strong belief
that Jesus Christ never wanted to start a new religion, and desired only to reform Judaism.”8 Because of the
short period of his ministry and paucity of early records about his religion, it is not easy to be categoric about
its history. The Bible was compiled only in the early fourth century A.D. During this period Christianity
became a cohesive societal religion, and underwent extreme sufferings, persecutions and martyrdoms. In
these centuries, except for its pacificism, Christianity exhibited all the features of a whole-life religion. In fact,
many pacificist Jewish sects had existed already, and except for the independent revelation of Christ, Christian
principles were not significantly different from theirs. The close ideological affinity of the two religions is
apparent from the fact that Torah and the Old Testament are a part of the Bible, which is a man-compiled
scripture. It is important to bear in mind that God’s revelation to Moses, which suggests the use of force for
a political or a societal purpose, is an integral part of the Bible. The variation is prilimary with regard to
rituals. It is, thus, apparent that Christianity, like Judaism, is a whole-life religion, with many doctrinal
principles common with the pacificist sections of Judaism. Except for the schism and subsequent tensions
that followed in the two religions consequent to the crucification of Christ, they have a common heritage and
cultural history.
6.9 After Christianity became the state religion in the fourth century A.D., the incongruity between
pacificism and political rule came to the surface. It was virtually a marriage of convenience. For the Roman
Emperor Christianity was a good cloak, on the one hand, to maintain the old Roman position of the monarch
being the representative of God, and, on the other hand, to be supplied with a cohesive people or force for
the expansion of his empire. Christians who in the early period had, because of their pacificism, declined to
join the army, started entering the forces of the Roman Empire. Christianity gained political prestige and
relief from suffering. But the position thus developed, became an ideological incongruity. The period of
persecution being over, it is in this period that Christian philosophers turned attention to framing its ideology.
Many of them gave it a completely otherworldly trend, suggesting that their religion did not have much to do
with the empirical world. The renowned St. Augustine in his famous treatise, C7ty of God, attacked both
Christians who expected the world to get better as well as the pagans with a cyclical view of history. He did
not believe that the spread of Christianity would ensure political and economic improvement. The earthy city
of self-will would continue to exist amidst the rise and fall of states and empires.”? We shall refer to this
development later as well, but this much is evident how a whole-life religion, once it adopts pacificism, slowly
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
and necessarily becomes otherworldly. For, the heightened moral sense of the religious man, when it is
unable to guide and influence the working of socio-political life, refuses to co-operate with it, and turns
towards monasticism and celibacy. Significantly, it is no chance that monastries and nunneries also started
appearing in the Christian life only round the close of the third century A.D. As is usual, these believers of
monasticism and celibacy not only became otherworldly, but increasingly emphasised Christian eschatology
of heavenly gains after death and the redemptive role of Chirst. Without going into a detailed account, it may
be noted that the ambivalence between the whole-life original character of Christianity and its later stress on
otherworldliness and monasticism has continued in its long history. For, in the later centuries not only priests
and the Pope led the crusades, but Joachim of Fiore applied Christian doctrines to secular affairs. “He had a
millenarian vision of a future age of the holy spirit, when love and justice would prevail on earth.” So much
so, that this theologian of the twelfth century A.D. is considered to be the forerunner of modern Christian
ideas. “Most of the secular ideas about the future in modern times are derived from Joachim’s interpretations
of the role of Christianity.’’®°
6.10 It is also well-known that Luther’s reforms led to another major change, and incongruities of
the Christian ideology became more significant. True, Chruch life improved, its monastic tendencies slowed
down, and there was greater interest in the empirical life. The Reformation gave a distinct fillip to empirical
life or what Weber calls ‘worldly asceticism.’ But, unfortunately the Church came under the control of the
national states instead of being their master. Since Luther had the support of the princes, this became
unavoidable. The ambivalence continued, and while the Calvinists approved of the use of force for a
righteous cause, Luther himself sided with the princes. He opposed the peasants who rose for their rights,
calling them mad dogs. But following the Enlightenment and the rise of science, religion was ultimately
sidetracked, and Secularism became the ideology, claiming to devise its own ethics for the empirical life.
Rousseau believed that Christ had created a spiritual empire, separating religion from political systems. For
Hobbes, the state was supreme in all matters. Kant had faith in the power of reason, and thought that it
would bring about a just political order. All these factors strengthened the power of the national states over
religious institutions and the Churches.
6.11 This ambivalent ideological trend in Christianity has continued upto the present century. But
the rise of two secular rulers, Hitler and Stalin (they and their methods and systems are not in disgrace), and
the two world wars have led religious men to rethink about the ethical life of man, which is in disarray.8! The
present position is that whereas the Churches of North America suggest that Secularism is a danger to
religion, and that it is time they co-operated with other religions to combat it, the majority in the World
Council of Churches believes that Secularism is a God-sent growth which embodies and owns Christian
values, and would be eminently helpful in destroying superstitious ideologies like Islam and Hinduism.*? Of
course, non-Christian religions have evidently a very different view of the moral role of the Christian West
and its national states, and uphold the minority view of the North American Churches. For, wars, tyranny,
massacres, ghettos, inquisitions, and large scale pogroms and persecutions, and consequent expulsions and
migrations from one country to another, have continued to be a part of the political life of the national states
in the West.
VII. PACIFICISM IN JUDAISM AND ISLAM
7.1. We have seen that both Judaism and Isalm are from the very beginning empathically mir-piri
systems. But in both of them at later stages of their history, withdrawal or pacific sects have appeared. It is,
therefore, necessary to record the circumstances of their emergence.
7.2 After the settlement of Jews in Canaan, Judaic kings appeared, the more famous of them being
David and Solomon. Their period of rule has been eulogised in history for its justice and wisdom. A
significant fact of Jewish history is that simultaneously with their kings, there lived respected Jewish prophets,
distinguished for their piety and upholding of ethical values. They were always critical of kings, if at any time
they faltered in their behaviours or in the administration of justice and the Law. This shows that not only the
kings were obliged to be fair and just, but there was also the institution of religious prophets who guided their
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
functioning, and were strongly critical, if the kings went astray. In short, this combination of the religious life
and the empirical life brought about a healthy social atmosphere for the people. It needs to be stated that the
king was not considered the representative of God, but he was supposed to run his administration according
to the ethical Laws of his religious system, and for that reason, was always subject to criticism, in case he
failed to uphold the prescribed values.
7.3 But in the sixth century B.C., the situation changed. This followed the major calamity of the
Babylonian attack on Jerusalem, which involved the destruction of the Temple and the compulsory migration
of the Jews as slaves to Babylonian territories. It is at this time that Prophet Jeremiah for the first time gave a
call that the Babylonian attack should not be resisted, since it was a punishment to the Jews by God for their
violation of the Laws prescribed in the Torah and their covenant with God. Not many Jews were left in
Jerusalem. Socio-political circumstances and pressures were such that men of religion took to withdrawal and
pacific and monastic cults. Political confrontation had failed, and it was thereafter that many pacific sects like
the Essenese, Kaballists and others came into existence. They continued side by side with the mainstream
Jews who accepted the basic combination between the religious life and the empirical life. From then
onwards Jewish history has mostly been centuries of suffering, massacres, migrations, and consequent
diaspora. In the subsequent periods of Roman, Muslim and Christian rule, Jews continued to be oppressed.
It is during the Roman rule that Christ was crucified. As revealed by the Jewish writings, manuscripts and the
Dead Sea Scrolls, it was a time when there were present many pacific or monastic cults. After their uprooting
from Jerusalem area, the Jews continued to be a minority in every European state, and persecution, pogroms,
refugee camps and ghettos remained their dismal lot.
7.4 Ultimately, in the nineteenth century the concept of Zionism, a homeland for Jews, became a
growingly settled Jewish goal. Einstein was a vocal Zionist. After the creation of Israel, it is the original
religious philosophy of Judaism that has been sought to be implemented. Rabbis invariable state that in
Judaism, the ideal person is a strong religious man, something of a sant-sipabi who is not a votary of non-
violence. In short, the presence of a society and the combination of religious and empirical lives is an integral
part of Jewish philosophy and heritage. What is significant is that despite their lean periods of extreme
suffering of about 2,000 years, when the opportunity has arisen, the Jews have reverted to their original goal,
which ideologically they never disowned, or shed.
7.5 The position in Islam has not been very different. Sufism in Islam is not an original
development. It appeared, as authorities like A. J. Arberry have stated, when luxurious living and corruption
became a patt of the life of the Muslim rulers. While the Qoran is a complete guide to the socio-political and
civil life of the Muslims, men of religion felt disgusted with the ways of their kings, and Sultans. It is at this
time that Sufism, a system of withdrawal and monasticism, with the attendant institution of kbankabs arose
and continued. It became in a certain sense a system of personal salvation. While Sufis lived a married and
pious life, and did the missionary work of Islam, unlike the Jewish prophets, they never became very critical
of the Muslim rulers, nor confronted them. It is significant, however, that because of the basic Islamic
ideology, Sufi prrs like Budhu Shah made major sacrifices on the battlefield, when Guru Gobind Singh took
up cudgels against the Muslim Empire in Punjab. But as a religious group they never, in any manner, sought
to oppose the tyranny or misrule of the kings. It is in this context, that Islamic scholars like Dr Iqbal and the
Nobel laureate Abdus-salam attribute the decline of Muslim culture and Muslim life to the dichotomous
institution of Sufism which on a large scale diverted the religious zeal and energy to ends of pacificism or
personal salvation. It is obvious that despite the vicissitudes of life, both Jews and Muslims now uphold their
basic miri-piri ideologies.
VIII. PRESENT IDEOLOGICAL THINKING IN THE CHRISTIAN WORLD
8.1 The glaring symptoms of internal contradictions, as reflected in the socio-political life and
events of the twentieth century in the world, have set many Christian theologians to rethink and reinterpret
Christian ideology, the fulcrum of which is Christ’s martyrdom on the Cross. The second major development
has been the fall of the Russian Empire. Ideas of Darwinism, Evolutionism, Marxism and Materialism had
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
given rise to a very confident euphoria and hope that Secularism and Communism would create a humanistic
force that would improve the life of man. While Marxism on the hand, rapidly expanded the Communist
hold over countries, both in the West and East, on the other hand, it deeply influenced the thinking of many
social scientists to suggest that all human developments, whether social, political, cultural, or economic, were
basically governed by the means of production and consequent socio-economic relations. It is in the above
context that we shall briefly indicate the ideological and theological thinking in the Christian West, especially
the one that has followed the experiences of the Second World War, and the events before and after it. The
main trend in the new thinking is the attack on unbridled Secularism and the Western divorce of religion
from politics, or the tendency of the national states to develop their own, what are called, “patriotic civil
religions”, and to reinterpret the Christian theology, especially the fundamental event of Christ and the Cross.
8.2 As Toynbee laments, the last 250 years have been the period of Secularism and national states in
which, as in the Greco-roman thinking, the goddess to be worshipped is the State, which also lays down the
values of social life. Secularism, by its very definition, has to devise its own ethical system, or what is called
the ‘civil religion.’ The result is that the twentieth century has not only created two major World Wars, but
over hundred national wars, involving brutal killings of more people in one century than those killed in the
entire earlier history of wars of man. What is most dismal and disgusting, is that it has produced political
monsters that have put into shade tyrants like Chengese Khan. Hiroshima, Nagasaki, and Auschwitz are its
unprecedented features. The future of man and the planet is at stake. This is the dark background that has
led to search for salvage of man from the deep moral crisis in which he finds himself. Both, the Churches of
the world and its thinking men, have been deeply concerned about it. It is a healthy feature that new thinking
about Christian ideology has appeared not only in the dark areas of Latin America and Germany, but also in
North America. Latin America has come out with its ‘Liberation Theology.’ It was a reaction to the church
life, in which on Sundays the persons who had for six days of the week suffered acute tyranny of the strong
and the rich, sat on the hind benches, while the ‘respectable rich’ who had done the oppression, occupied the
front benches. The priest could hardly do anything to alleviate the pain and persecution of the poor. It is in
this context that arose the Liberation Ideology. Catholic Archbishop, Holder Camara asserts that “the
violence of the rich against the poor, and the violence of the developed countries against the underdeveloped,
is more worthy of condemnation than the revolutionary violence that they create.’ In North America the
Churches came to the conclusion that Secularism was a danger to human values, and should be opposed with
the co-operation of other religions of the world. The World Council of Churches did not accept this view.
8.3 Similarly, the reaction in the Church was strong in Germany which had in one sense suffered
the worst during the secular rule of Hitler. Instead of burdening our essay with the views of large number of
thinking men on the issue, we shall give, by way of a sample, the thought of only a few theologians and
thinkers. Theologian Hurgen Moltmann in his essay, The Cross and Civil Refigion,®4 brings out with emphatic
clarity that “The crucification is a single public political act in the life of Jesus.” “Many have accused the
Cross of enshrining resignation, indifference to history or surrender to circumstances. Such views of the
Cross could never found a theology of hope or a political theology.” “Jesus indentified himself with those
who were abandoned, and challenged the status quo.” “Christ’s eschatological message attacks every state’s
claim to absolute loyalty. Functionally, Christ was seditious. Functionally, his crucification was a regnant
government’s repression of an alternate ultimate value that would relativise its own claims to be absolute.
Functionally, the Christ’s was the initial rejection by the Church, of all political structures seeking to become
religions. In this sense, the Cross represents divine rejection of political and civil religions.” This author
criticises the efforts of modern nation states to develop ‘patriotic civil religions.’ But Secularism and National
States consider it their right to create and lead their men to accept and believe in it. Moltmann sees this
tendency in America today, as it was in Germany in the time of the Third Reich, when German ideology
affirmed the separation of spiritual and temporal realms, and developed the theme of ‘political morality.’ He
asserts, “Today, the destiny of man is, as they saw, less and less dependent on natural environment, and more
and more dependent on technical civilisation, urbanisation, social milieu and politics.” “Theology that wants
to be responsible today, must consider self- critically the psychological and political implications of its words,
images and symbols. It can no longer view the Church’s institutional task as merely given and neutral,
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
thereby opting out in indifference. It must scrutinise each discourse about God : Does the Church supply
with religious opium or a real ferment of freedom ?” He adds, “Political theology wants to awaken political
consciousness in every treatise of Christian theology. Understood in this way, it is the premise that leads to
the conclusion that, while there may be a naive and politically unaware theology, there can be no apolitical
theology.” “Politically theology in our opinion no longer implies only theology and politics; church and state.
Rather, responsible theology must become aware of an inherent political dimension in itself and in Church
life.’ “The old theology of natural order could be understood as sanctioning the social status quo.” He
reminds us that the early Christians, conflict with the Roman state was because of its state religion, and they
were punished and persecuted as atheists, “godless and seditious followers of Christ.’ For him, early
Christian martyrology was the theology of the Cross.
8.4 Moltmann places “Crucifixion at the centre of Christian conflict with the Empire,” and add that
“Jesus’ eschatological message of freedom was implicitly a total attack on the very existence of the religious
state. In this sense, his crucifixion had political implications; it was not merely fortuitous.” Even Hegel saw
these implications, when he wrote, “When the cross has been elevated to the place of a banner, and is made a
banner in fact, the positive content of which is at the same time the Kingdom of God, inner feeling is in the
very heart of its nature detached from civil and state life, and the substantial basis of the latter is taken away,
so that the whole structure has no longer any reality.’ Moltmann feels that “The Christological starting
point is that Jesus was condemned as a blasphemor by Israel’s law.” “Those who recognise God in the
crucified one, see the glory of God only in the face of Christ, and no longer in nature, reason or political
achievement. Glory no longer rests upon the head of the mighty. For believers, Christ crucified was made
the righteousness of God, and for them political authority was deprived of its religious sanction.” “Modern
political theology considers the mortal conflict of Jesus with the public powers of his day to be central.”
While condemning withdrawal, he pleads for positive action and approach, “Emancipation from idolatry
requires a new motivation, a new direction to life. Hence, stoic equanimity makes little sense as a replacement
for idolatry. Such equanimity may remove man’s aggressiveness, but it makes him hard-hearted, able to live
neither in fear nor in hope. All things are alike to such a man, for he has become incapable of love. If
idolatry consist in absolutising a relative good, still its abolition must not lead to stoic indifference. Selfish
love is overcome in love of another; superstition is removed only by a faith which, freeing, makes possible
selfless love, otherwise an ‘enlightened’ man becomes all too quickly a wisened old man. Self-justification
always includes righteousness, but in a perverse form. Idolatry always includes faith, but in a despairing and
hybrid form. Selfish love is love, but love that destroys the life it so desperately wants to preserve. We can
cast down the idols, man continually fashions, so that they do not arise again. A God who guides man to the
Lordship of creation, who justifies those who are unable to justify themselves, who makes possible selfless
love for those whom He loves. For theology to work out the practical significance of these ideas, it must
relate itself to the Enlightenment program of critical reason aiming to effect the liberation of mankind.”
“This means that the Church’s task of liberating men from idolatry through faith must deal with social,
economic, political and racial alienation as well as with religious alienation. Churches must be shaken to their
foundation, and become institutions of socio-political freedom (as Metz has demanded). It is, however,
impossible to eliminate religious idolatry, while one is aligned with a political or an economic idolatry.
Conversely, it is impossible to criticise political or economic idolatry when religious alienations remain
untested.” He concludes, “Therefore, the theology of the Cross is the theology of hope; and the theology of
hope is the theology of the cross.” “According to its Biblical traditions the Chruch everywhere has to be with
those for whom there is neither state, nor status. The Christian faith founded on the Cross must begin again
to demythologise the state in which it lives. This will succeed only if it concomitantly analyses the religious
situation of those, who according to the present order of things, have no status. Christianity was not founded
as a national religion. Its ‘Deus Crucifixus’ is a ‘Stateless God.’ But even though its God is stateless,
Christianity did not originate as a private religion, and its God is not an ‘apolitical God.’ From the beginning
of Israel’s history, Yahweh was known as the God of the poor. This tradition runs through Israel’s history,
despite its covenantal and national institutions : ‘For Thou art God of the lowly, Helper of the oppressed,
Upholder of the weak, Protector of the forlorn, Saviour of those without hope’ (Judith 9 :11). In order to
clarify his revolutionary position he adds, “It would be a misunderstanding to think that the promise given to
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
those who have nothing in this world, means their compensation after death, and their riches in heaven.
Quite the opposite is true. The poor do not go to the Kingdom of God, rather the Kingdom of God comes
to the poor. The Kingdom of God begins in this world with the poor; the justice of God comes justifying
those who are suffering from injustice. The new feature promised by God begins not in the ‘beyond’ but in
the appearance of the Son of Man among the neglected. This new feature of God is not some ‘vanguard of
social progress and cultural development’, rather, it belongs to those who are in the dark and, therefore,
ovetlooked. With the Cross, the future of God allies itself with those whom a self-satisfying and a conformist
society has reduced to nothing. The oppressed are no longer the object of charity of the rich, nor recipient of
aid in the developing nations, but are themselves custodians of Law and redeemers of the rich. The rich do
not save the poor, the poor save the rich. How can this happen ? Only the poor know the oppression of
exclusion from riches. Only the humiliated know the pain of humiliation. Only the hated know the
wretchedness of hatred. Conversely, the rich, the oppressors, and the haters are unknowing and blind, they
unconsciously live in terms of an objective communal delusion, and despite their own effort and critical
theory they manage to remain blind to the way things really are. The oppressed hold in their hands the key
for the liberation of mankind from oppression.” Quoting Christ, he refer to Black Theology, “What you have
done to the least of my brethern, this you do unto me; who visits them visits me.” “The Christian church is
not co-extensive with the Church of Christ, as long as it cannot express the twofold brotherhood. The
Church would be false, if in the spirit of triumphantalism, it represented only the risen Lord, and claimed to
be the Kingdom of God. The Church, because of Christ crucified, should search out and identify with those,
whom by his sufferings and death he took as brothers. It can only credibly preach the Gospel as a call to
freedom, if it utters the cry for freedom of those reduced to silence. Is there some justice in J. Cone’s
contention in Black Theology that it should be theologically possible in the 20th century to see Christ as
black, as it was in the 1st century to see him as Jew.” He reiterates his ideas in his conclusions, “Liberation
from the idolatry of a nation’s political religion, introduces people to the universal Kingdom of God in
fellowship with the others.” “The freedom of Christian faith transforms a nation’s self-justification into
solidarity with the victims of its political religion; Christian faith seeks to act as the representative of those
who are victimised. Ecclesiastical institutions cannot persist in their socio-political neutrality, nor can they
leave social responsibility to individual Christians alone. Moreover, because Churches have a certain public
respectability and influence, they cannot develop into institutions that exercise genuine social criticism. Only
if the Churches bind themselves completely to the lives of the ‘others’, will they free themselves from their
alliance with the dominant society, and its religious need for self-justification.” “A Christian political theology
wants to bring Christians to a point of solidarity to the place where Christ awaits them. In the sufferings of
the outcast on this earth Christ awaits his own. Christian hope focuses not simply on a better future, but on
the future of the hopeless.” Finally he concludes, “The thesis of this treatise is : the Cross is our political
critique, the Cross is our hope for politics of freedom. The memory of Christ crucified compels us to a
political theology.”
8.5 Johann Baptist Metz warns Christians against working and running into the groove of sectarian
mentality, “Traditionalism could never be a theological characteristic of the missionary church of Jesus Christ;
traditionalism is a characteristic of the sect. This gives us a catchword for what will occupy us in the second
otientation, namely, the danger of sectarianism.” “The danger of sectarian mentality appears in a more
theological way in my opinion in the notion of a ‘pure theology’, a new elitist gnosis that articulates the
aristocratic side of the sectarian mentality.” He questions, “For, how could a church which became a sect in
the theological sense, still be the church of Jesus Christ ? It would be the completely assimilated religion of a
secularised society. Ultimately what remains is the dead, stifled residue of a hope that was once vital and
courageous and liberating for all, a hope to which there is no alternative, either purely within the history of
attempts to create freedom or purely outside of (i.e., in isolation from) that history.”®° Metz’s above
observation reminds us of the unfortunate and somewhat parochial approach of the majority in the World
Council of Churches, particularly of Barth, Brunner and Kramer, when they rejected the laudable approach of
the North American Churches for co-operation with other religions in order to fight the looming danger of
Secularism. The European theologians maintained, “that secularisation, not Secularism, is a process in which
some of the values of Christian faith have been put into a secular framework, bringing about a powerful
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
force, which is destroying all old ideas. Hence secularisation is an ally, because it will destroy Hinduism,
Islam or what they consider to be superstitions. So we should ally ourselves with secularisation and see it as
the work of God.” That was Bon Hoffet’s, Barth’s and Kramer’s point of view, writes Metropolitan P. M.
Gregorios. Unfortunately, until today the above view prevails, saying “We do not feel that we have anything
lacking. And so we ate opposed to dialogue unless it is for the sake of testifying to Jesus Christ.”°’ Metz
considers that “The Christian hopes not in just any open future, but precisely in that future which is shaped
by God’s sovereignty and brings justice to the oppressed. Our memory of Jesus constantly forces us to
transform ourselves in order to do justice to this future. This memory breaks through the dominant
consciousness of our age, a one-dimensional way of looking at things, which hides the fact of oppression and
injustice from us.’’8
8.6 Other theologians, too, hold the view that Church and politics cannot remain isolated. Neibuhr,
the distinguished theologian of the century, in his major work, Moral Man and Immoral Society, argues, “Because
of the evil in man and in society, Christian political action called not simply for love, but for an attempt to
give each group within society enough power to defend itself against exploitation by other groups. Althouth
relations between individuals might be a matter of ethics, relations between groups were a matter of
politics.”®° Theologian Gutierrez also asserts that salvation means “to struggle against misery and exploitation
and involves all men and the whole of man.’
8.7 Aldous Huxley who continued making spiritual experiments, categorically spoke against a life of
isolation, or of spiritual bliss alone. In his letter to Humphery Osmond he wrote : “The Indians say, the
thought and thinker and the thing thought about are one and then of the way in which this unowned
experience becomes something belonging to me; then no me anymore, and a kind of sat-chit-ananda, at one
moment without Aaruna or charity (how odd that the Vedantists say nothing about love) ...... I had an inkling
of both kinds of mirvana — the loveless being, consciousness, bliss, and the one with love, and, above all,
sense that one can never love enough.’”®! About staying in bliss, he answers : “You can immobilise it, but it
isn’t the real thing. You can remain for eternity in this thing at the exclusion of love and work.” Such
ecstatic withdrawal he called making the greatest ‘Ice Cube’ of a ‘Flowing River’ of love. He calls it “a
temptation to an addiction of even higher order; the addiction of being in the Light and staying there.” But
he considers : “Staying in this ecstatic consciousness and cutting oneself off from participation and
commitment to the rest of the world — this is perfectly expressed today in the powerful slang in the phrase
‘dropping out.”’ He emphatically asserts, “It completely denied the facts : it is morally wrong; and finally of
course, absolutely catastrophic ‘Absolutely Catastrophic.”’ “These two words”, his wife writes, “he said with
the most earnest and profound conviction,” and adds that “these remain sculptured on the soul of anyone
who hears it. It is a definitive statement : One cannot isolate oneself from one’s fellow and environment, for,
there is no private salvation; one might ‘get stuck’ in even Pure Light instead of infusing it in ‘Love and
Work’, which is the direct solution of everyone’s life, right here and now. Love and Work — if I should put
in a nutshell, the essence of Aldous’s life. I could not find a more precise way of saying it.’
8.8 In Sikhism all conflicts of man are believed to be due to human egoism, and for that reason, are
basically moral, this being a religious problem. Hence divorce between religion and life or any aspect of it, is
a contradiction in terms. For, neither reason, nor economics, nor politics can help to solve the human
problems. They can be instruments but not solutions.
8.9 In the field of thought Kant expounded the a@ priori existence of morality as a ‘categoric
imperative.’ His emphasise on reason and his assumption that human reason would ultimately lead to social
emancipation, hardly solves the problem of man. For, if human interest or desires have to be fulfilled and
each man menas to fulfil his own desires, it remains an anamoly and a question how in a democratic set up,
the ruler will deny the opportunity available to him to fulfil his own desires and will instead pursue the desires
of others to the exclusion of his own.°? It is the same old objection as raised by Thrasmachus before
Socrates, that justice ultimately reduces itself to be the ‘interest of the strong.’ Russell concedes that while
materialism explains the source and structure of things and life, it has failed to account for the source or
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
existence of values.°* Merely stating that values are a matter of feeling or ‘reaction formation’, and a part of
the ‘defence mechanism’ of man in order to react against the social and other environment, explains nothing.
It merely begs the question. On two scores Russell contradicts the Marxian view of human affairs being a
play of the means of production. For “the social circumstances, of which account must be taken, are as much
political as economic; they have a lot to do in the game of power, of which wealth is only one form. Further,
even social causation largely ceases to apply as soon as a problem becomes detailed and technical.’’5
IX. LESSONS OF RELIGIOUS HISTORY
9.1 We have outlined that religions can safely be divided into two broad categories, dichotomous
religions and whole-life or miri-piri religions. They have also been called life-negating and life-affirming
religions. Each of these categories has clear and distinguishing characteristics that are in matters of goals,
ideology, methodology and institutions, opposed to each other. The history of man shows that in practice
and operation one category becomes a religion of personal salvation, and the other accepts social
participation, and full responsibility and expression in all fields of life. Further, we have seen that in their
long history, in periods of their sufferings, even whole-life religions tend to accept withdrawal, monasticism,
celibacy and pacificism. However, whenever opportunity arises and reconstruction or revival is possible,
whole-life religions, as in the case of Judaism and Islam, seek to regain their earlier moorings in order to
practise their original system in its purity. It is significant that Judaism and Islam, in which withdrawal and
pacificism appeared in their lean periods, clearly indentify that development or phase, as the cause of its
decline or lack of vigour. In fact, ideologically the pacific sects, even though in existence, are never looked
upon as leaders of the community. For, the ideological contradiction between the original system and the
pacific variants is obvious. Actually, serious tensions have often arisen between the Church of the religion
and the monastic mystics. Whereas the original Church is whole-life, and leads the entire community, the
pacific variants remain unconcerned with it, excepting for the salvation of their small group. Obviously and
logically, they cannot be the ideal or represent the community, especially because of their departure from the
line of the original prophet.
9.2 The case of Christianity stands apart. For, while it is a whole-life religion, accepting the role of
family and society, it has, because of the Sermon on the Mount, from the very start been pacific. In order to
understand the position, we have tried to indicate developments in its history in somewhat greater detail than
in the course of other religions. The facts reveal that from the very beginning, because of its basic ideology
of love of its neighbour, it not only was demonstrably a societal religion, but for that reason, straightaway
came into conflict with the Roman State, where the Emperor claimed to be the representative both of God
and the temporal life. Hence the clash between the ‘state religion’ and the ‘universal religion’ of the
Christians, as in the case of Christ himself, became inevitable. Thus followed centuries of suffering,
persecution and martyrdoms.
9.3 Early in the fourth century, marked changes appeared in the Christian life. For, Christianity
became a state religion. The same developments took place as in the case of some other whole-life religions,
when they had lost their zeal and elan to battle with the problems of life in accordance with their original
systems. Two features of this change become clearly identifiable. First, it is towards the end of the third
century A.D., that monastic, ascetic, or withdrawal trends started appearing in Christianity. From the fourth
century arose quietism and large scale organisation of monastries and nunneries. Just as in the case of Sufism,
the number quietist mystics and saints these institutions have produced, is very large and galore. The system
and its institutions slowly gained respectability and acceptance. Celibacy and the consequent stigma against
women also appeared, with the result that priests were barred from marriage, and women could not become
priests. This limitation in the Catholic Church continues even today. The social results of this change
became increasingly visible. First, the man of religious devotion receded from the empirical life towards
which he felt no responsibility, and his moral influence ceased to enrich it. Second, the religious leadership,
thus, became depraved and enfeebled, and, this gave rise to growing corruption in the Church which
ultimately led to the Reformation. Conversely, the moral tone of the Christian society, its political
management and its capacity to face political challenges, showed a worsening decline. This is evident from
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
the subsequent history of Christian society. With corruption in the Church and increasing political struggle
and tensions between the kings and the popes, fall in the ethical standards was natural and distinct. Cruel
inquisitions, massacres, pogroms and ghettos became almost a constant feature of the Christian socio-political
life. That we are not exaggerating the faults of the Christian political life, should be clear from the contrasted
level of conduct and tolerance shown by the Muslim rulers in Europe towards other religions, including Jews
and Christians.
9.4 The second feature of the above development was a change in approach from life-affirmation to
otherworldliness. This change is obvious both from the ideas of Christian theologians and the understanding
of scholars about Christian history. Saint Augustine, as quoted earlier, believed that Christianity would not
improve the political or secular life, which would continue to exist as before. In short, Christianity had hardly
anything to give to the life of the common man. It is also well-known that Christian ideology in its formation
derived very heavily from neo-Platonism, which was a religious development that, apart from being a system
of complete withdrawal, appeared at a time when Greek life was at it lowest ebb, and its days of vigour had
long since been over. Plotinus, recommended contemplation alone, without leading to any activity,°° which in
a way was considered a fall. Since the days of Christ’s confrontation with the Empire and his crucification,
Christianity remained under serious pressure and persecution. It could hardly produce a theologian of note,
and even the Bible could not be finally compiled until after the beginning of the fourth century A.D. Hence,
ideologically neo-Platonism was the only handy and respectable system which its scholars found available to
model its ideology upon. The Kingdom of God became, thus, an entirely otherworldly affair. And, as
happens under such circumstances, ritualism and formalism gained primary importance, and became the
essential features of the system. The following words of Bertrand Russell graphically represents the position
of the socio-religious life of the community : “It is strange that the last men of intellectual eminence before
the dark ages were concerned not with saving civilisation, or expelling the barbarians, or reforming the abuses
of the Administration, but with preaching the merit of virginity and the damnation of unbaptised infants.
Seeing that these were the preoccupations that the Church handed over to the converted barbarians, it is no
wonder that the succeeding age surpassed almost all other fully historical periods in cruelty and
superstition.”’°” The subsequent history of the Church and the Christian monarchs, and life of the people
show the havoc otherworldiness can cause in a whole-life system of love that recommends social
responsibility towards the downtrodden. The promise was for a good life in heaven, but not on earth.
Historians like Gibbon and Sir James Fraser, clearly record that the otherworldliness of the Christian society
enervated it, and was one of the major causes of the fall of the Roman Empire,°* and the success of the
barbarians.
9.5 Thus from the fourth century onwards corruption in the Church, serious fall in the public
morale and socio-political life, and the otherworldy structure of its ideology, became notable features of
Christianity. The Reformation, while it brought about a distinct improvement, both in the Church and public
life, gave a major blow to the Church Universal and its supremacy over political rulers. With the rise of
national states, the Church in each state increasingly became its handmaid. True, it gave rise to what Weber
calls ‘worldly asceticism’, but side by side, it also prepared the ground for the ultimate rise of Secularism,
Individualism and Consumerism. It is also true that Enlightenment, Science and consequent Industrialisation
and Technology, hastened these trends, but the marginalisation of religion was the potent cause which
ultimately loosened the internal moral brakes of the Western life. There was a time when it was considered
that Science and Technology would, in not so distant a future, bring about a major improvement in human
life. But the happenings of the twentieth century have dispelled all such hopes. Toynbee writes : “After
having been idolized for a quarter of a millennium as the good genius of mankind he has now suddenly found
himself undeservedly excreated as an evil gentus who has released from his bottle a jimm that may perhaps
destroy human life on earth. The arbitrary change in the technicians onward fortunes is a severe ordeal, but
his loss of popularity has not hit him so hard as his loss of confidence in himself : Till 1945 he believed
without doubt that the results of his work were wholly beneficial. Since 1945 he has begun to wonder
whether his professional success may not have been a social and a moral disaster.”°? For the last about three
hundred years the national state has been supreme, and the twentieth century has seen Secularism completely
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
in the saddle. It is in this context that we have to understand the wars of the century, its large scale killings
and its monster rulers who never hesitated to kill millions of their own citizens.
9.6 It may be argued that we are only picturing the dark side of otherwise promising developments.
But the anomalies of the modern life are too obvious to be ignored. Not that there have never been
contradictions in human affairs, but their gravity has been growing both for man and the planet. Over a
quarter century back the secular authors of the Club of Rome’s report, Limits of Growth, gave a serious
warning that human and national egoism has to be curbed seriously, if disaster for man has to be avoided,
saying, “The world system is simply not ample enough nor generous enough to accommodate much longer
such egocentric and conflicting behaviour by its inhabitants.”! This warning was given over a quarter
century back. It remains unheeded, and the annual expenditure on militarisation has reached the level of a
thousand billion dollars per annum. In the Third World the population explosion, which in the present
political climate appears impossible to curb, continues unabated. The fall of the Russian Empire, because of
causes mostly internal, has given rise to some serious introspection.
9.7 After the Second World War serious rethinking has taken place the world over, especially in the
field of Christian theology, which is, by and large, the religion of the dominant countries of the world. The
tise of Science and Technology had also given a serious fillip to the eminence, and to an extent even to
arrogance, of social sciences which tended almost to monopolize the explanation of all developments and
movements in human affairs. Willi Oelmuller in his well-known essay, The Limitations of Social Theories,\!
brings out major gaps in their understanding and methodology. On the point of search for truth he states :
“Today, decision making procedures in the sciences and in all research dependent on the economy and the
state, operate not according to any logic which arises out of a pure scientific interest in the truth. Rather, they
are widely dependent on extra-scientific, military and national interests. Critical rationalism has not, to the
present time, developed adequate criteria for identifying and diagnosing this set of relations.” While we are
planning everything, there is no answer to the question : “Whether the science and research which seek to
plan everything that can be planned, and done, is really serving social progress, Le., is really serving the
removal of hunger, the overcoming of oppression and the prevention of war.” On the other hand, we find
that our Einsteins, Oppenhaeurs and Sakharovs, serve and further the interest of the national state. The
danger is that “Scientific reason is increasingly instrumental, society increasingly governed by technology, and
individuals increasingly powerless and susceptible to manipulation. Emancipation through revolution and
reform is ever more difficult. In this situation, it is imperative to insist that freedom from tyranny of nature
and the domination of man over man, means more than socio-technical progress or blind revolutionary
action; similarly that progress means more than constantly increasing needs, production and consumption.”
It is a fact that under well organised and heavily militarised national states the common man remains a
helpless tool, subject to subtle and corrosive influences on his thinking and life. The growing tendency is that
Social Sciences in their anxiety to gain scientific status have increasingly become in principle determinate in
their conceptions of the human person, the goal of human life and the phenomenon of negativity.!0? This in a
way either eliminates or marginalises the role of values in life. This, we believe, is the major problem that the
twentieth century and its tragic developments have posed before man. For, life in shown to be a determined
flow of events without goal or hope.
9.8 It is in the above background that we find a serious ferment and thinking in the Christian
theological world. Christ’s life on the Cross is the fundamental spiritual event that gives rise to a universal
call to men of religion to struggle for the Kingdom of God on earth and give relief to the downtrodden and
the hungry.
X. CONCLUSIONS
10.1 In the above context let us have a look again at the religions system and the role of the Gurus.
Theirs is a thisworldy system calling upon man to live a life of love and hope, and zealously to struggle against
evil, and for the creation of the Kingdom of God on earth. It is Guru Nanak who gave the call for a life of
love, and to waver not from making every sacrifice in the struggle against evil. In their Scripture compiled
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
and authenticated by the Gurus, they not only laid down distinct spirituo-ethical principles of life and the
responsibilities of man, but also demonstrated in their personal lives extending over almost two and a half
centuries how to live a true socio-spiritual life. They trained, conditioned and motivated an organised society
led by them to struggle against all forces that impede the socio-spiritual progress of man. The history of the
Guru period is a demonstration of how sufferings, and martyrdoms and fight in every field of life become
necessarily a part of the responsibility of the spiritual man and the seeker. Here it is relevant to recall the
criticism of Bertrand Russell of the Christian life of the Middle ages, and to state the contrast shown by Guru
Nanak in first recounting every dark spot in the socio-political and religious life of his time; and then to plan,
and devise ways and institutions to bring about improvement in every field, religious, social, and political. To
the extent possible it is this organised society that took care not only to stop a 1,000 year wave of invaders
and to supplant the oppressive political rule of the times, but, as facts show, also to bring about a distinct
improvement in the socio-moral life and sense of responsibility of the common man. The basic thesis of the
Gurus is that values are the sustaining sap of life and that God or the Basic Reality is the Flowing Immanent
Source of it. That life is a venture of hope, provided man links himself with that, Altruistic Flow, works in
line with His Will or Direction, and draws his strength and zeal from that Gracious Fount. Two important
conclusions emerge from the Gurus’ thesis. First, that ours is not a determined or a dismal world, nor are,
for the matter, values a meaningless ‘deffence mechanism.’ On the other hand, values have a distinct and a
basic role to promote a life freedom, harmony and creativity, which is enriched by linking oneself with that
Fundamental Flow of Love, and falling and working in line with it. Dichotomy or what Huxley calls making
Ice Cubes of a Flowing River, is wrong, and responsible participation in unison with His Current is essential
for the progress and emancipation of man. Evil or negativity is due to the imperfection and egoism of man,
but the future is not without hope. Reason and other instruments of life are at best limbs of the individual
psyche, and, while they can be used for a good end, they become a hurdle and a handicap, unless used for the
purpose of the Flow.
10.2 We have already indicated some of the historical impacts and features of this mzr7-piri system.
Apart from its achievement against the invaders and the oppressive Empire, the rule of Ranjit Singh shows,
that in contrast with all the contemporary rulers of the world, his treatment of all subjects, including Muslims,
was fair and liberal. No attempt whatsoever was made at conversion of anyone to Sikhism, nor were his
administration and time sullied by communal riots, massacres, migrations or pogroms.
10.3. The significant fact has been that miri-piri thinking has brought about a transformation and
regeneration of man in his thinking, motivations and approach towards life of the common man in the Sikh
society. It is this distinct change in the ethos and moral of the masses and the Sikh society which drives
them, on the one hand, to make maximum sacrifices for the freedom of man, and, on the other hand to
create the wherewithal for promotion of production, and sustenance of life in general. It is also shown how
difficult and slow is this process. It is most important that this change in ethos can be brought about only by
the man of religion who has faith in the originality of values and their Source.
10.4 Let us recapitulate the notable features of and the lessons from our brief survey of the religions
of the world. Without going into the historical background, it is a fact that all Indian religions except
Sikhism, have been dichotomous and continue to be so for the last 2,500 years. Without the presence of this
dichotomy between the spiritual life and the empirical life, the discriminatory institutions of caste and
pollution could neither survive nor be continued till today. Some Indian thinkers like Mahatma Gandhi have
tried to curb or change it. However, it is also a fact, as Dr Amebedkar, the framer of the Indian Constitution,
explains, that the Mahatma made every effort to maintain its structure intact. As Weber and Ambedkar have
explained, reform of the Hindu society from within, is virtually impossible,!® because of scriptual sanctions
to the institutions of caste. Most Indian thinkers lament the fall in values and ethos in the socio-political life
of the country today. The values, professed by Gandhi and Nehru, have simply disappeared, as if they had
lived and laboured in some other society.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
10.5 The history of the two miri-piri systems, Judaism and Islam, has clearly shown that pacificism
and withdrawal with their attendant features, have appeared in those two systems, only when socio-political
life of the people became lean, so that they were unable to meet the challenges of life. It is only when the
spirituo-moral fibre of a people fails to cope with the battles of life, that its religious men tend to recede from
the mainstream into monasticism, asceticism, celibacy and pacificism and the system of personal salvation. It
is not necessary for us to say that pacificism and withdrawal contribute towards decline of social morale and
vigour of life, or that these features and institutions appear, when the socio-political life suffers defeat and
decline. In any case the two positions are contemporaneous. And when ever opportunity has arisen, these
societies have again harked back to the original call of their prophets. The thinkers of the two communities
have openly attributed the decline to the dichotomy, and for that reason have suggested reversion to the
original theses of their systems.
10.6 The religious history of Christianity has been extremely chequered. May be, changes or
ambivalence in its later ideological expression has been due to the very short ministry of Jesus, its crowing
event being the crucification. We have indicated that neither during the time of Jesus Christ, nor during the
early centuries of martyrdoms and persecutions, was there any sign of bifurcation or otherworldliness. But
major changes in interpretation and theology followed, when after the beginning of the fourth century, on the
one hand, appeared monastries, nunneries and withdrawal, and, on the other hand, started the decline in the
socio-moral life of the people and their institutions. Protestantism curtailed the supremacy of the Church,
leading, in the subsequent centuries to the slow and undisputed rise of Secularism, which seeks to devise its
own ethics, value system or civil religion, and for that matter, accounts for the marginalisation or virtual
elimination of the role of religion in life. After the Second World War a distinct disillusionment with the
secularist philosophies has started among some sections of the thinking and religious men of the West.
Solynstein who almost predicted the fall of the Russian Empire, was critical of the West for its liaison with it.
Civil religion, whether of the Communist society or of the Free Market society, cannot be sustained. That is
why men of religion have criticised it. Important sections of the Christian religious world, as noted earlier,
clearly interpret the crucifixion of Christ as not only the landmark of a universal struggle, but also as a
continuous clairon call for the elimination of oppression, and relief to the downtrodden through political
means. Hence the call of Father Camilo Torres that “the Catholic who is not revolutionary, is living in mortal
sin,” and the willingness of priests in South America to endorse the use of force.
10.7 Dr Walsh’s statement appears fairly representative of the modern thinking, when he says that
the present theological thinking in Christianity is that “The question of Jesus and/or Christianity’s pacificism,
however, remains hotly debated, as it has been for centuries. In general, the Just War Tradition has won out
with its conviction that there are occasions when it is legitimate and appropriate for the Christians to take up
arms. Peace Churches have generally been in a minority, e.g., Annabaptists and Mennonites.” In the same
survey he observes that “Sikhism’s major contribution to the world has been its sense of responsibility in the
world, emphasis on spiritualisine what have been viewed as secular spheres of life,” and that “in Sikhism
salvation is not another-worldly event, but is directly related to our actual life on earth, it being a religion of
responsibility, a religion of ethics.” In short, the conclusion of numerous Christians theologists the world
over and thinkers like Huxley is clearly for the acceptance of a whole-life system, and for active socio-political
participation and sense of responsibility towards the oppressed, wherever they are. Christology and the Cross
are the basis to invoke this interpretation. There are understandable reservations regarding the use of force,
but the majority opinion is certainly for its minimum use. With the fall of Russia the damage done by
Secularist philosophy has been exposed, and analysis done about the inherent limitations of the social science
theories, especially in the field of values, has been brought out.
10.8 There is an unmistakable lesson of our survey based on the historical role of the world
religions, namely that when the mri-piri systems like Judaism, Islam and Sikhism, have participated in the
socio-political sphere, the resultant administrations of rulers like David and Solomon in the Middle East, of
Muslim rulers in Europe, and of Ranjit Singh in North India, have been far more fair and humane than the
administrations of rulers following dichotomy in the socio-religious field. Not that an utopia was brought by
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
anyone of them, but the ethos of the times created by the religions concerned, was such that both cohesion
and internal moral brakes of the system were strong enough to restrain those who wield power from
indulging in tyranny and oppression.
10.9 This being the broad history of the major religions of man, the validity of the various elements
of Sikhism, a mri-piri system, laid down by the Sikh Gurus, has to be seen in the light of that experience.
Apart from others, two lessons of this religious history are clear. And, the Gurus took pains to devise ways
and means to ensure that the pitfalls, that could arise from certain ideological and other developments, were
avoided. First is the necessity for the clarity of canon, the essential elements and doctrines of a religious
system. The world over their late compilation into the concerned scriptures has so often given tise to
variation in interpretations and consequent confusion or even schisms in society. To avoid this the Gurus
themselves compiled the Scripture, so as to set at rest for all times any doubts about its asuthenticity. Second
to avoid any confusion in interpretation of the Scripture, as has happened in other systems, the Gurus
themselves lived and demonstrated in their lives the principles of their system over a period of 240 years.
And, this they did in response to all social, environmental and political challenges of the times. Another
important thing is that having finally organised the Sikh society started by Guru Nanak, Guru Gobind Singh
prescribed certain symbols continually to remind the Sikh of his socio-religious responsibilities, and the
fundamental canon of the Sikh system. The &rpan, as explained earlier, has been prescribed for regular wear
of the Sikh, so that he remains constantly aware of the three fundamentals of the Guru’s system, and his
responsibilities, as a member of a muri-piri society. To recapitulate, the three principles are : first
confrontation with oppression and injustice; second, permission to use only minimum force; and third, not to
withdraw into monasticism or samyasa. The importance of these three steps the Gurus took, speaks volumes
for their sense of history and their vision of the future in order to ensure the continuity and purity of their
system.
10.10 We have attempted to explain the mr-piri character of Sikhism and to stress that this
character is a fundamental part of its structure and concepts. But here it appears necessary to indicate three
features which Sikhism does not share with the other whole-life systems. These features are their
exclusivism, consequent reluctance to co-operate on terms of equality with other systems, and, a zealous
missionary tendency for conversions. Without going into detail it is known that these three features of
whole-life or societal systems, have not been uncommon, and for that reason have attracted criticism from
religious thinkers. For, the features are regarded as corollaries of the systems themselves. It shows the
foresight and vision of the Gurus that they themselves took steps to avoid the possibility of any such
developments in Sikhism. The concepts of ‘chosen community’, ‘seal of prophets’, or ‘salvation only through
their prophet’ are known signs of exclusivism. But while Guru Nanak created a new religious society, it was
also he who laid down in his hymns that his mission was to elicit the co-operation of other God-men in order
to ferry people across the turbulent sea of life.!* It was an emphatic statement against exclusivism, and for
ready co-operation with other religious men or societies. Thus he imparted universal character to his system.
Second is the point about salvation only through a particular system or prophet. Against this, there is a clear
hymn of the Guru in Guru Granth Sahib praying for His Gracious intervention to save the burning world by
any means or path (door),!0> He may be benevolent enough to do. This not only concedes that there are or
could be other valid religious systems, but also clearly warns against exclusivism, saying that the creation of
the Path, rests with Him and not with any human, howsoever high he may be. A prophet can at best be His
instrument to help the wavering, on to that Path or Door. This universalism is also evident from the daily
prayer of the Sikhs which seeks from God the blessings for all, the world over. The third feature relates to
large scale coercive conversions, often indulged in by whole-life systems. For ideological and other reasons,
this has never happened in the history of Sikh religion. The reason for it is the lead given by the Gurus
themselves. Sikhism, as Guru Nanak stated, and as for that matter any religious path, is a most difficult path.
Por, Guru Nanak in his very first call stressed that the game of love involves total commitment and sacrifice,
and that, once man treads on this path, he should waver not from sacrificing his all for it. The same total
commitment to sacrifice everything was desired by the Tenth Guru, when he chose the Five Praras to
administer awrit to them. The very nature of the sacrifices contemplated and demonstrated in Sikhism, and
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
the lead given by the Gurus, make it plain that the commitment demanded to tread the Sikh path is total.
Therefore, converting people by coercion to this path is hardly relevant or necessary. Because by the very
nature of the system, forced conversion becomes a contradiction in terms. This explains why in the period of
the Sikh rule, the Sikhs remained in a minority in Punjab, for there was never any organised system for
conversion, much less for forced conversions. Of course, people did become converts of convenience to
gain prestige, and they reverted to their old faith as soon as political benefits became scarce. On the other
hand, in Guru Granth Sahib itself, the Gurus ask men of other religions to follow truly the path of their own
religions, and that instead of adhering to ritualism they should lead a moral life of virtues and values.
10.11 It is obvious that Sikhism, accordingly to its concept, doctrines, institutions and history, is
fundamentally a miri-piri system, started by Guru Nanak. While its ideological as well as social fundamentals,
were laid down by Guru Nanak himself, over a period of time, it surely and gradually developed into a whole-
life or miri-piri system, unaffected by the accidents, exigencies, or influences of the milieu or history. It is
important to understand that every system has its own logic, and so have miri-piri systems and the
dichotomous systems. Each of them creates, develops and fructifies into its own characteristic institutions,
and plays a role that is germane, natural and necessary to it. Basically, whole-life or miri-piri systems are
societal from the very start, whereas dichotomous systems are invariably for personal salvation, unconcerned
with the society as a whole. Any study in depth regarding the essentials, corollaries and history of a system
leaves no room for confusion in distinguishing one system from the other. It is, however, true that scholars
do sometimes display misunderstanding in identifying the role and character of Sikhism. Many a time it is
due to their ignorance of the basic system of classification of religions, or their personal predilections and
conditioning by the system or milieu to which they belong, or sometimes their inability to shed the burden of
the un-dimensional social science methodology, which, as we have explained, is either too simplistic or fails to
take into account the role of religion and its institutions, history and values. Otherwise, as explained by us,
Sikhism on account of its ideology embodied in Guru Granth Sahib, its institutions and the history of the
Guru period is unambiguously a mir7-piri system.
REFERENCES
1. Guru Granth Sahib : p. 459.
2. Ibid., pp. 294, 463.
3. Ibid., p. 1 (Japuji).
4. Ibid., pp. 522, 886, 1376.
5. Juergensmeyer, Mark : Sikb Studies, Berkeley, pp. 83-88.
6. Mann, J.S. & Kharak Singh : Recent Researches in Sikhism, Punjabi University, Patiala, 1992, p. 24.
7. Guru Granth Sahib: pp. 7, 8-9, 62, 113.
8. Ibid., p. 1412.
9. Ibid., p. 1245.
10. Machwe, Parbhakar : Namdev, pp. 59-60.
11. Nihar Ranjan Ray : Sikb Gurus and the Sikh Society, pp. 61-62, Punjabi University Patiala.
12. Guru Granth Sahib : pp. 889, 1171.
13. Annie Besant : English Translation of Bhagawat Gita, pp. 252-54. Jaiswal, S. : Origin and Development of
Vaishnavism, pp. 111-12.
14. Guru Granth Sahib : p. 1289.
15. Bhalla, S.D. : Mebma Parkash, p. 3206.
16. Mann, J.S. & Kharak Singh : op. cit., p. 24.
17. Daljeet Singh : The Sikh Ideology, p. 94.
18. Ambedkar, B.R. : Writings and Speeches, Vol. V, pp. 340, 388.
19. Gupta, H.R. : Hestory of the Sikh Gurus, p. 110.
20. Ibid., p. 93.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
21. Ibid., pp. 92-3.
22. Ibid., pp. 92-3.
23. Ibid., p. 93.
24, Ibid., pp. 100-1.
25. Ibid., pp. 101-2.
26. Ibid., p. 104.
27. Ibid., p. 111.
28. Ibid., p. 104.
29. Ibid., p. 114.
30. Guru Granth Sahib : pp. 145, 224, 1028.
31. Gupta, H.R. : op. cit., p. 110.
32. Jadunath Sircar :_A Short History of Aurangzeb, p. 150.
33. Gur Bilas Patshahi Chhevin, p. 29.
34. Gupta, H.R. : op. cit., p. 110. Mohammad Latif : Hestory of Punjab, p. 256.
35. Ibid., p. 119.
36. Ibid., p. 125-6.
37. Ibid., p. 130.
38. Ibid., pp. 135, 136, 139, 140.
39. Hagiqat-i-Bana-u-Uruj-i-Firga-t-Sikhan (1783), p. 3-6. Quoted in The Sikh Review, Calcutta, Feb.
1990, p. 22. Banerjee, A.C. Journal of Sikh Studies, GNDU Amritsar, Feb. 1976, p. 61.
40. Gupta, H.R. : op. cit. p. 139-140.
41. Ibid., p. 177.
42. Ibid., p. 155.
43. Ibid., p. 233-34.
44. Ibid., pp. 35-36, 239-40.
45. Bhangoo, Rattan Singh : Panth Parkash, (Jit Singh Sital), p. 189.
46. Piara Singh Padam : Rehat Name,’Tankhahnama Bhai Nand Lal, p. 47.
47. Macauliffe, M.A. : The Sikh Religion, Vol. I, pp. 7-8, 419.
48. Azad, A.K. : India Wins Freedom, p. 34.
49. Ibid., p. 108.
50. Seervai, H.M. : Constitutional Law of India, p. 143-47.
51. Russell, Bertrand : Unpopular Essays, pp. 53-7.
52. Smullyan e¢ a/: Introduction to Philosophy, p. 367.
53. Jagjit Singh : The Sikb Revolution, pp. 286-87.
54. Gupta, H.R. : op. cit., pp. 231-240.
55. Jagjit Singh : op. cit., pp. 261-279.
56. Bhai Gurdas : Var 11, Dabistan, translation by Dr Ganda Singh, Panjab Past and Present, Vol. III,
(1969), p. 53.
57. Macauliffe, M.A. : The Sikh Religion, Vol. IV, pp. 107, 197.
58. Jagjit Singh : op. cit., pp. 278-280.
59. Lewis, James : Advanced Studies in Sikhism, edited by J.S. Mann & HLS. Saraon, pp. 269-271. Recent
Researches in Sikhism, edited by J.S. Mann & Kharak Singh, Punjabi University, Patiala, 1992, pp.
291-295.
60. Dowley, Tim (Ed.) : Eerdsman’s Handbook to the History of Christianity.
61. Jagyit Singh : The Sikh Revolution, pp. 205-12.
62. Gupta, H.R. : op. cit., pp. 148-49.
63. Mann, J.S. & Kharak Singh : op. cit., p. 54. Rajinder Puri: Rediscovery of India, p. 21.
64. Viyjayalakshmi, Pandit : The Tribune, Chandigarh, March 1970.
65. Nur Mohammad, Qazi : Jang Namah (1765). English Trans. Ganda Singh, Amritsar (1939),
pp. 58-59.
66. Ghurye, G.S. : Caste and Race in India, pp. 11-12.
67. Sardesai, G.S. : The New History of Mabrattas, p. 52.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
68. Mann, J.S. & Kharak Singh : op. cit., p. 367. S7kb Rule and Ranjit Singh by G.S. Dhillon.
69. Osborne, W.G. : The Court and Camp of Ranjit Singh, p. 94-5.
70. Swami Sivananda : Spiritual Experiences, pp. 242-44.
71. Torah, The Jewish Publication Society of America, Philadephia, USA, P. 141.
72. Ibid., p. 122.
73. Ibid., p. 150.
74. Ambedkar, B.R. : Baba Saheb Ambedkar’s Writings and Speeches.
75. Coomaraswamy, A.K. : Buddha and the Gospel of Buddbism, p. 214.
76. Maitra, S.K. : The Ethies of the Hindus, p. 244.
77. Ibid., p. 265-266, 263.
78. The Bible : New Testament, St. Mathew, 5.17.
79. Dowley, Tim : op. cit., p. 5.
80. Ibid., p. 5.
81.Schumacher, E.F. : A Guide to the Perplexed, p. 132.
82. Dialogue & Alliance, A Journal of International Religions Dialogue, 1987, pp. 94-95.
83. Dowley, Tim : op. cit., p. 637.
84. Moltmann ef a/: Religion and Political Soaety. Institute of Christian Thought, Harper and Row
Publications, New York, London, pp. 12-47.
85. Hegel, C.W.F. : Philosophy of Religion, New York, Humanities.
86.John Baptist Metz : Redgion and Political Soaety, Harper and Row Publishers, New York, London,
pp. 195-203.
87. Dialogue & Alliance : op. cit., pp. 94-95.
88. John Baptist Metz : op. cit., p. 204.
89. Dowley, Tim : op. cit., pp. 595-597.
90. Ibid., p. 610.
91. Huxley, Aldous : Moksha, p. 115.
92. Ibid., 222-223.
93. Russell, Bertrand : History of Western Philosophy, p. 744.
94. Ibid., p. 788.
95. Ibid., p. 751.
96. Smullyan : op. cit. p. 363.
97. Russell, Bertrand : op. cit., pp. 362-363.
98.Toynbee, A. : Christianity and Cwilization, Burge Memorial Lecture, Oxford; Pendel Hill,
Wallingford, Pennsylvania, pp. 12- 17.
99. Toynbee, A. :_An Historians Approach to Religion, pp. 233-34.
100. Club of Rome Report : Limits of Growth, pp. 191-192.
101. Oelmuller, Willi e¢ a/: Religion ¢ Political Society, A Harper Forum Book, pp.121-170.
102. Moltmann é¢ a/: op. cit., Joan Lockwood, p. 125.
103. Ambedkar, B.R. : Annihilation of Caste, Ed : Mulk Raj Anand.
104. Guru Granth Sahib : p. 939.
105. Ibid., p. 853.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
2
POLITICAL IDEAS OF GURU NANAK
GURTEJ SINGH
A brief appraisal of the opinions of historians of the Sikhs and prominent writers about the political
concerns of Guru Nanak may form a proper beginning of the present undertaking.
Early historians of the Sikhs generally refused to read a political content in the message of Guru
Nanak.! It is not a coincidence that they were also the supporters of the contemporary British Empire. It
appeats that Cunningham was the first to doubt the veracity of such observations and speaking of Guru
Axjun wrote, “he was that first who clearly understood the wide import of the teachings of Nanak, or who
perceived how applicable they were to every state of life and to every condition of society.’
Indubhushan Banerjee while agreeing that “the future Sikh nation grew on the foundations provided
by Nanak’, would not agree with Cunningham that “Guru Nanak had some original distinctiveness which
alone could provide the basis of the nation.”+ This position runs counter to the underlying thesis of his book
and can, in part, be legitimately attributed to his desire to save Guru Nanak for Hinduism as a reformer
within its fold.
Arnold Toynbee held Guru Hargobind responsible for violating the “spiritual trust” of his
predecessors by entertaining “vulgar worldly ambitions” and for transforming the “embryonic church into
embtyonic state.”> It is however apparent that he was under a compulsion to fit Sikh history into a
framework he had contrived for it. It is now fairly well established that his views in this regard are inadequate
as well as untenable even within the framework of his own formulations. For instance, he clubs Sikhism
with Kabirism in his S7vdy of History, but is not able to explain why Kabirism, which shunned “vulgar worldly
ambitions”, did not progress as it should have done according to his formulation. It never made any impact
on society and history as Sikhism did.
Generally it is true to say that those who were able to distinguish “that Sikhism should be regarded as
a new and separate world religion rather than as a reformed sect of Hindus”? are the same who also could
appreciate “something positive and realistic” about Guru Nanak’s work which is indicative of “a religion and
a state.”8 The religion preached by Guru Nanak originated in a clearly perceived whole-life system which was
absolutely fresh and hence beyond the comprehension of those who were used to other systems which were
mostly dichotomous in varying degrees.
Sikh literati, including men of history, literature, philosophy and theology have always been more
explicit and have all along discerned pronounced political currents in the thought of Guru Nanak. Ganda
Singh considers him to be “the founder of the militant church of Sikhism.”? Along with Teja Singh, he is of
the opinion that during the entire period of development, there was “no break, no digression in the
programme of Sikh life.”!° Mohan Singh, studying the writings of the Gurus, could discern only “difference
of accent” from Guru Nanak to Guru Gobind Singh.'! Sita Ram accepts Babarvani verses to be the “first ......
voice against oppression.” !?
Sher Singh dealing with the philosophy of Sikhism, opines that inspite of the development of two
hundred years, the basic doctrinal truths, which had been preached by Guru Nanak, remained the same.!3
Kapur Singh observes about the formation of the Khalsa that “it was a logical development and entelechy of
the teachings of Guru Nanak.”!4 Kartar Singh sums up the generally held view about the political concerns
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
of Guru Nanak when he says that he would have reacted to oppressions, sword in hand like Guru Gobind
Singh, if he likewise had the nation at his back.!
Any analysis of Guru Nanak’s views must begin by first noting his emphatic claim to prophethood.
Disclaiming a worldly preceptor, he accepted God as original and true Guru to be his sole Teacher.!6
Claiming direct and intimate touch with Reality, he asserted that he had been specifically commissioned by
God to disseminate knowledge of the Divine.!? While emphasising direct inspiration, he goes on to say, “I
have been given a permanent revenue free grant by God himself and others, who lay tall claim to high
spiritual status, are like mere temporary tenants.”!® Everything that he uttered was, therefore, directly inspired
and explicitly sanctioned by God.!9 It could hardly be otherwise, for, “One may speak of Him if one has seen
the Unseeable One, or else preaching is to no purpose.”?? His mandate to interpret the Will of God was
upheld and his status of a prophet was insisted upon by the succeeding Gurus?! and Sikh theologians
including Bhai Gurdas and Mani Singh.” “The Truth which filled his mind was not borrowed from books; it
came to him as illumination of his entire life”, and while scholars wrangle loudly over the questions of
influences, “so says Nanak, is the burden of his songs.”
Political views of the Guru are also intimately connected to his acceptance of this world as real and a
legitimate sphere of activity for a man of religion. He realised that the “Omnipresent One lives in His
creation and pervades it in all directions.”** Wherever he looked, he “found the Merciful One whose very
shadow the earth is.’*5 His teachings are, therefore, grounded in the basic concept that God is Love and that
He is intensely interested in human destiny or Godward journey. He cares and lovingly directs human beings
in their evolution from the ignorant, ego-oriented manmukb to the enlightened and liberated gurmukh. It is his
belief that spiritual progress is possible only in society. The Guru, therefore, denounced asceticism and
advocated the fulsome life of a householder setting the example himself by, in addition, accepting the
professions of a civil servant and an agriculturist. His concern for the material world was as great as his
preoccupation with the spiritual one and he essentially sought to secure the next by worthwhile social and
political activity in this.2° “Those who serve others in this world are respectfully received in the next.”?’ The
Guru reproached Bhangarnath for having renounced the world and told him that life in society was a
precondition for spiritual attainment.?® His favourite expression for ideal balance is that one must live
unsoiled by the dross, but in the midst of everything, as the swan lives in water without getting wet.”
In relation to activity in this world, the most significant and frequent description of God by Guru
Nanak is in a vocabulary befitting an emperor.*° He consistently addresses Him as “my King, true King, and
King of Kings, He has his court, His throne and His palace. He is the sole Sovereign and sole Wazir. He has
his eight-metal coin, the Word. To Him belongs real command; all power and praise belong to Him alone
an Indeed to find honour in His court is the aim of human life.”’3!_ God is the only Sovereign entitled to the
allegiance of mankind. True Sovereign performs truely sovereign functions of destroying the evil-doers*
and of promoting the good.* He dispenses even-handed justice. Together, these constitute the aim of all
earthly political activity.
One significant factor that the Guru stresses in this connection is the soul’s innate and intense desire
to know God and to become one with Him. Thete are several passages of the Guru describing this
yearning.*> Those who feel no such yearning are termed as animals wrapped in human skin.** As a Guru, the
knower of Reality, he prescribes that for successful catering to this divine inclination of the soul, a seeker
must here and now attain the status of a liberated one. Every human being is expected to incessantly strive to
become a gurmukh. 1n terms of individual personality and psyche, the exercise seeks the complete and
absolute transformation of both. The process is variously expressed by Guru Nanak as that of “rust being
turned into gold,”3’? of “ghosts and animals being transformed into angles’?8 and of “crow becoming a
swan.”3? This miracle according to the Guru is to be attained by successfully imbibing attributes which the
knowing Guru has revealed to be those of God. For a human being that is the only method of living in God.
The unusual metaphor describing the state is, “companions of the Guru have become philosopher’s stone on
coming in contact with philosopher’s stone.”40 There are further references like the suggestion that by
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
contemplating on the Fearless One, one becomes fearless. The culmination is to become like the One you
serve."!
There is much in Guru Nanak which establishes that the vital process must remain a dead letter
unless political conditions conducive to it prevail. According to the Guru, this all important spiritual journey
cannot even be started by a politically oppressed person. Victims of Babat’s invasion, for instance, are in no
position to serve God.” The opportunity is also denied to those groaning under an alien culture. The Guru
is emphatic that no religious activity under such circumstances is possible at all. It is obviously the duty of a
God-oriented man to take effective measures so that such contingency never arises. Significantly, he rules out
divine intervention for the purpose. The obligation to perceive evil and to engage it in battle with a view to
eradicating it, is solely that of a man of God. The Guru is not averse to the use of force for the purpose and
advocates active armed resistance; he deplores the lack of any preparation of the Lodhi rulers to repel the
sinning hordes of the invader Babar.
Those who are called upon to rule also have their obligations. Nothing comes to anyone as a result
only of his individual striving, by performing penances or by observing rituals, but in accordance with His
Will (Aukm) and by His Grace (adr). He creates everyone;*° elevates as well as degrades.4”7 Rulers must be
spiritually wide awake persons, who constantly live in values derived from revealed attributes of God,
otherwise they are base pretenders.4* Firm commitment to justice and equity alone makes a rule legitimate.
The exercise of sovereign power must also be free of evils pointed out by the Guru. There are loud and
strong suggestions in Guru Nanak’s bani which indicate that a ruler loses the right to rule when he fails to
comply with the above requirements.*? God does not tolerate deviation on such vital matters and decrees the
lapse of the mandate. This loss of mandate is to be taken seriously by men of religion, who must execute the
command to remove a rejected ruler.
It is in the context of the above discussion that some of the most poignant political comments of
Guru Nanak must be interpreted. He has mentioned martyrdom in war amongst the accepted modes of
attaining salvation.° He is certain that under certain circumstances it is more honourable to resist and die
than to just continue living passively.5! Most significantly he recommends dying for a cause of God, stating
that a person who dies thus, attains acceptance at His Court.*? In an oft repeated couplet, he requires a lover
of God to be ready to sacrifice his head on the path of love.*3
In an ideal political set up, grave duties are cast upon a man of God. He must fully appreciate the
conditions under which a mandate to tule is granted. It is his pious religious duty to discern when it has been
violated. There is also no doubt that the attainment of sammum bonum by him squarely depends upon his
promptness and willingness to execute the command of God withdrawing the mandate. No sacrifice is to be
considered too great for the purpose. If one shirks one’s duty in this regard, one is no man of religion, does
not live in the light of God and exists only at the animal level, wasting the unique opportunity for salvation.
From his utterances, it is possible to precisely enumerate some of the evils that the Guru would like
the people to resist. Denial of justice, oppression, arbitrary curtailment of right to life, dishonouring of
women, plunder, undermining the accepted social norms of a cohesive group ate amongst the specific forms
of evil the Guru abhors. Many of the above are mentioned in the Babarvani verses.>4
CONCLUSIONS
The most significant single factor in the political thought of Guru Nanak is the firm belief that an
individual cannot tread the spiritual path alone, that eventually salvation outgrows the bounds of personal
relationship of the individual with God and must take the society, social and political organisations into
account. His teachings, which make life in society a pre-condition to spiritual fulfilment, exclude the
possibility of regarding the highest worldly position as incompatible with the purest spiritual life. In fact, it is
possible to suggest that Guru Nanak considers politics to be the ultimate test of faith.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
For Guru Nanak, the sole aim of individual existence on earth is the attainment of the highest
spiritual status or consciousness. Consequently, the ultimate aim of social and political activity as envisaged
by him is to facilitate its attainment. Accordingly, for him, such activity becomes meaningful and relevant if it
seeks the spiritual welfare of the people and is beneficial only in proportion to the extent it serves to bring it
about.
He, however, denies to the state the power to regulate matters of spirituality or conscience. He
resents such interferences by the contemporary state and some of his most vehement denunciations of it are
in this context.55 He advocated that the primary allegiance of a man of God must be to righteousness, truth
and conscience and denied the claim of the state exclusively to rule over the souls of its citizens. His ideal
appeats to be a sovereign individual in the image of God he worships and imitates as a matter of religious
discipline. Constituted as it was, political authority is consistently disregarded by him and is held directly
responsible for many ills of the contemporary society. On emerging from the river Vein after his commission
to prophethood, he made a statement repudiating allegiance to a temporal power. The messengers came and
said, “Nanak the Khan has summoned you” and Baba Nanak replied, “he is your Khan, what do I care for
him.”5° It was perfectly in line with his pronouncement : “he who stands in the presence of God, needs to
bow to no other.”5”
From heartfelt laments about violation of other people’s culture by powerful aliens, which abound in
the Guru’s bani, it is legitimate to conclude that the Guru’s concept of basic political organization revolves
around the cultural cohesiveness of a people. He would have society as a conglomeration of such units with
inviolate autonomy existing freely and so regulated as to be without an inclination or an opportunity to violate
any other similar unit. Guru Nanak is imbued with the concept of intrinsic worth of human personality. He
believes that an individual, with the help of God, can transcend his baser self. He is certain that by right
conduct, incessant striving, rigorous discipline and God’s grace, an individual can lift himself to divine status.
Such a desirable status is defined as that of a gurmukh, a sadb, a jiwan mukta and that of a ruler or panch — in a
word the ideal man of Guru Nanak and Guru Granth Sahib.
God as love stands for peace and harmony in His creation. It is His Will that those who love him
must not await a miracle to restore peace. It is the knower of the Will, the gurmukh, who must execute it and
restore normalcy. He must be the shelter of the shelterless, a refuge for the weak, as God showers His grace
where the weak are supported.
REFERENCES
1. For instance, Sir Charles Gough accuses other writers of Sikhs of telling “more than they
knew.” And though he himself wrote less than a page and a half on Guru Nanak in a
book relating to Sikh Wars, still he ventured an opinion that the Guru founded a “sect
entirely religious without any political aim or organization.”
Gough, Sir C. and Arthur D. Innes : The Sikhs and The Sikh Wars, A.D. Innes & Cov.,
London 1897, V. 18.
Payne, who did not understand Guru Granth Sahib found it unreadable, and had no access
to Guru’s Word, nevertheless observed that Guru Nanak did not “profess to be the
founder of a new nation, his purpose was ethical, not political.”
Payne, C. H. :.A Short History of The Sikhs, Thomas, Nelson and Sons, London, pp. 29, 25.
Same could be said of others of the above category including General J. H. Gordon : The
Sikhs, Blackwood & Sons, London 1904, p. 24 and of W. L. M. Gregor: The History of
The Sikhs, Vol. I, James Madden, London 1846, pp. 39, 44.
2. Some modern historians of the Sikhs like Reverend W. H. McLeod also fall in this category.
3. Cunningham, Joseph Davey : A History of The Sikhs, John Murray, London 1849, p. 53. This
position appears to have been taken hesitantly, as it is also observed by him that the Guru had
no clear views on “political advancement.” Ibid., p. 48.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
4. Indubhushan Banerjee : Evolution of The Khalsa, A. Mukherjee & Co. (Private) Ltd., Calcutta (2nd
Edn.) May 1963, p. 19.
5. Cf. Toynbee, Arnold J. : Stady of History, 10 Vols., Oxford University Press, 1935-54, Vol. V, pp.
187, 65 67, 673, Vol. VIL, pp. 414-415, Vol. VI, p. 466.
6.Cf. Singh, Kapur : Parasaraprasna, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar 1988, pp. 197-206.
See review by Daljeet Singh : “The Sikhs — History, Religion and Society” by W. H. McLeod :
The Panjab Past and Present, Punjabi University, Patiala, April 1989, pp. 250-59 for discussion on
position of Sikhism on the issue.
Also Cf. Grewal, J. S. : Toynbee’s Interpretation of Sikh History, Punjab History Conference, Patiala
1969, pp. 304-10.
7. Field, Dorothy : The Religion of The Sikhs, 1901 (Reprint) Ess Ess Publications, Delhi 1976, pp. 10,
60.
8. Archer, J. C.: The Sikhs in Relation to Hindus, Moslems, Christians and Abmadiyas, Princeton University
Press, 1946, pp. 60-61.
9. Singh, Ganda : “The Maratha-Sikh Relations,” The Panjab Past and Present, Punjabi University,
Patiala, October 1967, p. 311.
10. A Short History of The Sikhs, Orient Longmans Ltd., Bombay, 1950, p. 14.
11. An Introduction to Panjabi Literature, Amritsar 1951, pp. 65-66.
12. “Nanak Bani Vich Phalsafa,” Madh Kalin Punjabi Sabit, (Pbi.), Bhasha Vibhag, Patiala 1970, p. 64.
Singh, Lal : “Guru Nanak da Shahkar,” Shabdarath Bani Guru Nanak Dev Ji, (Pbi.), Bhasha Vibhag,
Patiala 1970, 31 comment on Babarvani verses is that they represent a revolutionary call ......
sharpened on the spiritual sharpener to become a sword’s edge.”
13. Gurmat Darshan (Pbi.) Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee, Amritsar, 1962, p. 47.
14. Cf. Preface to Parasaraprasna, Hind Publishers Ltd., Jullundur 1959, p. 12.
15. Life of Guru Nanak Dev, Lahore Book Shop, Ludhiana, 1958, p. 231 f.n.
16. Sorath, Guru Granth Sahib, p. 599 :
Alprampar parbrahm parmeshar Nanak gur milia soi jio.
also, Ramkali, Guru Granth Sahib, p. 878 :
Gur Parmeshar Nanak bhetio sache sabad nibera.
17. Var Mah, Guru Granth Sahib, p. 148:
Hau dhadi bekar kare laiya. Rat dihai kai var dhurhu farmaiya. Dhadi sache mahal khasam
bulaiya. Sachi sift salab Rapra patya.
18. Guru Granth Sahib, p. 1286:
mY mihmUd ilKwieAw Ksmy ky dr jwie ]
duinAw ky dr kyqVy kyqy Awvih jwie ]
19. Tilang, Guru Granth Sahib, p. 722 :
Jaisi mai avai khasam ki bani taisra kari gian ve Lalo.
also Wadbans, ibid., p. 566 :
Ta mai khatya Raihan ja tujbai Rahaiya.
20. Gauri, Tbid., p. 222 :
Adist disai ta Rahia jae.
Bin dekhe Raihna birtha jae.
21. Gauri M. IN, Ibid., p. 308 :
Satgur ki bani sat sat kar janhu gursikhu
har karta ap mubhu kadbae.
Gauri ki Vat M. IV, Ibid., p. 306 :
Th akar tin akhia jini jagat sabh upaia.
Sorath M. V. Ibid., p. 628 :
Dhur ki bani aae tin sagh chint mitai.
22. Bhattan de Swaiye, Ibid., p. 1395 :
Alp narayan kaladhar jag mahi parvario.
Ibid., p. 1408 :
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Jot rup ap Guru Nanak kahaio.
Varan Bhai Gurdas Ji, (Pbi.), Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee, February 1952, Var I,
Pauri 35:
Tk baba akal rup.
Mani Singh, Bhai : Sikban di Bhagatmala, (Pbi.).
Khalsa Samachar, February 1955, p. 90.
Jis nirnakar da vichar devte brabmadik, nahin pai sakde so Guru Nanak ji hain.
23. Seshagiri Rao, K. L. : “Guru Nanak and The Hindu Heritage,’ The Journal of Religious Studies,
Punjabi University, Patiala, September 1969, p. 48.
24. Srirag, Guru Granth Sahib, pp. 83-84 :
Kudrat kar ke vassia soi.
Jeh dbir dekha teh dhir mauzood.
25. Mara, Ibid., p. 1038 :
Jaih dekha taih din dayala ......
Jag tis ki chhaya jis bap na maya.
26. Ramkali, Ibid., p. 952 :
Karni bajhon bhist na pat.
27. Srirag, Ibid., p. 26:
Vich dunian sev Ramaie ta dargah baisan pate.
28. Varan, Bhai Gurdas Ji, op. cit. p. 20.
29. Sidh Gosht, Ramkali, \bid., p. 938 :
Jaise jal meh kamal nralamu murgai naisane.
30. For an almost complete compilation of such terms see Sekhon, Sant Singh : Madh Kalin Punjabi
Sabit, (Pbi.), Bhasha Vibhag, Patiala 1970, pp. 118-26.
31. Grewal, J. S. : Guru Nanak in History, Panjab University, Chandigarh 1969, pp. 148-49.
32. Suhi, Guru Granth Sahib, p. 729 :
Ja kau mahal hajur dujaia nivai kis.
33. Mara, Ibid., p. 1028 :
Assur Sangharam ram hamara.
34. Gauri, Ibid., p. 224:
Daint sanghar sant nistare.
Sri Rag, Ibid., p. 59 :
Sukh data dukh metno satgur asur sanghar.
cf. also Gauri, Ibid., pp. 224-25.
35. One such passage is found in Rag Wadhans, Ibid., pp. 557-58.
36. Mathar, Ibid., p. 1284 :
Pasu manas chum plete androh kahia Suhi,
Ibid., p. 751:
Mul na bujhan apna se pasua se dhor jio.
37. Mam, Ibid., p. 990 :
Bhaia manur kanchan phir hovai je gur mile tineha.
. Parbhati, bid., p. 1329 :
Satgur paaiai pura navan pasu prethu dev Rare.
39. Srirag ki Var, Ibid., p. 91:
Jo ts bhavai Nanka Ragu hans kare.
. Basant, Ibid., p. 1172:
Paras bhet bhae se paras Nanak har gur sang thiat.
. Gauri, Ibid., p. 223 :
Bhai rach rahe so nirbhauhoai,
Jaisa seve taiso hoai. Ramkah,
Ibid., p. 931:
Jin jata so tis hi jeha.
3
co
4
j=)
4
a
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Ibid., p. 936:
Tin hi jaisi thee raban jap jap ridai murar.
Sidh Gosht, Ibid., p. 943 (cf. also Freedkot Wala Teeka, Bhasha Vibhag, Patiala 1970, p. 1940) :
Alnhat sunn ratte se Raisai
Jis te upje tabi hi jaisai
42. Rag Asa, Ibid., p. 417 :
Tk na wakhat khuhaieh ikna puja jae ......
Ram na kabhu chetia hun Rahni na milai khudat.
43, Ramkali, \bid., p. 903 :
Kal puran Kateb Ruran.
Pothi pandit rahe puran.
Nanak nao bhaia rahman,
Basant, Ibid., p. 1191:
Ald purakh kau allah kahiai sekhan aai vari.
Deval devtian kar laga aisi kirat chal.
Dhanasari, Ibid., p. 662:
Thaanast jag bhrisht heo dubta w jag ......
Khatrian ta dharam chhodia malechh bhakhia gahi.
Srisht sabh ik varan hoi dharam ki gat rahi.
44. Rag Asa, Ibid., p. 360 :
Ett mar pai Rurlane tain ki darad na aaiya
cf. also ...... pp. 417, 418.
45. Rag Asa, Ibid., p. 360 :
Ratan vigar vigoai Rutti muia sar na Raat.
Ibid., p. 417:
Aiggo de je chetie ta Rait mile sajaai.
Saba surat quaiab tangg tamasai chaai.
46. Japji, Ibid., p. 7:
Jor na raj mal man sor.
Wadhans, Ibid., p. 566 :
Sarbai samana ap tuhai dhande latya.
Tk na tujh ki Riai rajai ikna bhikh bhavaiya.
Asa, Ibid., p. 472 :
Tk nihali pai savan ikna upar rahan kharai.
47. Ibid., p. 472:
Nadr upathi je Rarai sultana gha Raraida.
48. Japji, Ibid., p. 3:
Panch parvan. Panch pardhan,
Panchai pavhi dargahai man,
Panchai sohai dar rajan.
49, Asa, Ibid., p. 417-18 :
Jis no ap khuvai Rarta khus laai changiai ......
Jin ki chiri dargabi phati tinha marna bhai ......
Jai tis bhavai dai wadiaat jai bhavai dai sajai.
50. Var Asa, Ibid., p. 467 :
Lakh surtan sangram ran mahi chhutai pran.
51. Ibid., p. 142:
Je jivai pat lathi jai Sabh haram jeta kichh Rhaat.
52. Wadbans, Ibid., pp. 579-80 :
Mabli jaai pavhu khasmai bhavhu rang sio ralian mane? ......
Maran Maansa suria hag hai marn parvano.
53. Slok Varan te Wadbik, Ibid., p. 1412:
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Jau tau praim khailan ka chan,
Sir dhar tali gali more ao.
54. Popularly known as Babarvani verses are four in number. Three have been composed in Rag Asa
by Guru Nanak and one is in Rag Ti/ang. Altogether they add up to ninety-nine lines.
In greater part of these verses, the Guru describes the woes of an unequal contest.
He sees it as potentiality of the evil to triumph and perpetuate itself if inadequately resisted. He
ridicules the efforts of those who pretended to provide supernatural support against the
offenders, and advises that being adequately prepared to resist is better preparation against
such an eventuality. He exhorts the victims not to be overawed by the barbarian hordes, as
their success, being in violation of God’s Will, is ephemeral. They would soon reap what they
had sown if resisted effectively by the God-oriented.
Brutal violation of a people, their culture and religion agitates him much. A third part of the
verses is devoted to depicting the sad plight of women which has particularly moved him. He
considers it to be the consequences of evil being given a free hand. The victims have not
made adequate preparation, have been lured to life of wanton luxury, and material pursuits,
lived in ignorance of God’s Will, so they must share the responsibility for what is happening to
them.
The Guru prefers a people capable of protecting the honour of their women-folk and
maintaining their religious, political and cultural heritage inviolate.
God is unequivocally accepted as the final arbiter in political power, as in everything else.
55. Rag Asa, Guru Granth Sahib, p. 470:
Kal main bed atharban hua nam khudai aallah bhaiaa ......
Var Malar, Ibid., p. 1288 :
Hansan baajan te sikdaran ehna apria nao.
FPadkhi lagi jat fahain agai nahi thao.
Dhanasari Ibid., p. 662 :
Thanst jag bhrisht hoe dupta iv jag.
56. Puratan Janamsakhi Bhai Vir Singh (ed)., Khalsa Samachar, Amritsar 1971, p. 43. See also Bhalla,
Sarup Das : Guru Nanak Mahima, (Pbi.) (Reprint) Bhasha Vibhag 1970, p. 34.
57. Rag Suhi, Guru Granth Sahib, p. 729 :
Ja Kau mahal hajur dujai nivai kis.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
10
SAINT-SOLDIER
KHARAK SINGH
I. THE BACKGROUND
To grasp the significance of the ideal of ‘saint-soldier’, it would be helpful briefly to refer to two most
prominent features of the religious tradition of India before Guru Nanak. These are:
(a) Dichotomy between spiritual and empirical life, and
(b) The Caste system.
While the former was common to practically all systems of religious thought, the latter constituted
the very foundation of the diversity of faiths included in Hinduism.
DICHOTOMY BETWEEN SPIRITUAL AND EMPIRICAL LIFE
In a monistic system like Sankra’s Vedanta, the world is unreal or mithya. In dualistic systems like
Yoga, Sankhya and Jainism, two kinds of Reality are assumed — spiritual and material. And man is a
combination of both. In Buddhism the world is a place of suffering in the endless cycle of birth, life and
death. Goals vary ftom a realisation of the self to deliverance from transmigration, or nirvana ot mukti ot
merger with the Ultimate Reality. The effort of the individual is directed towards a selfish end of personal
salvation with little or no regard for, or even at the cost of, society and fellow-men. Worldly activities were
considered incompatible with, and a hindrance to spiritual progress. Renunciation or withdrawal from the
world, asceticism, celibacy, and ahimsa were essential components of the spiritual discipline prescribed. There
was little scope or need for altruism or moral deeds. Dichotomy between spiritual and empirical life was
complete. In Nathism, which was the predominant faith at the time of Guru Nanak, the initiate had to take
vows of following no occupation, living on alms, celibacy and ahimsa. Although living as a parasite on society,
the Naths looked down upon householders, and any concern with society was considered irreligious and
beneath the dignity of a religious man. Some of the practices endowed with religious merit have been
recounted by Guru Arjun Dev :
Despite recitation of holy texts, study of Vedas and praxis of bowels and the Kundalini,
From the five agents has not come parting of company,
And more and more in egoistic thinking is one bound.
Cherished one ! by such devices comes not union —
Innumerable are the means I have adopted.
Tired of all such, at the Lord’s Portal I threw myself,
Praying, ‘Grant me discriminative understanding.’
Vows of silence I observed; on my bare hands received food,
And unclad in forests wandered;
I wandered over water-edges and holy spots over the earth —
Still has duality not dropped off.
At holy water-edges I resided where desires are fulfilled.
Had the saw placed over my head;
Yet thus is not impurity of mind washed off, despite a million devices.
Gold, maids, horses, elephants — thus charities of various kinds I dispensed;
Gave away grain, clothing, land —
Still found I not the Lord’s Portal.
To offerings before deities, sprinkling sandalwood paste,
folding of hands,
Lying prostrate, and to the six ritual acts have I remained devoted.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Still, by egoism in bonds am I fallen —
Not by these devices is the Lord met.
Highty-four poses of Yoga-praxis too to exhaustion I performed;
Lived to a great age, yet found not union with the Lord,
And into transmigration fell.
Royal display of glory, the pomp of kingship I had,
And exercised absolute authority;
I lay in elegant couch, applied to my limbs
sandalwood and attar — all these are gateway to terrible hell.
Divine laudation in holy company is the supreme act of piety.
Saith Nanak : This to such comes as by primal writ are this destined to receive.
In such joy of devotion is Thy servant absorbed.
By grace of the Shatterer of suffering of the humble,
To Divine laudation is my mind devoted.!
CASTE SYSTEM
The Indian caste system is a unique institution evolved by the Hindu society, and has no parallel
anywhere in the history of the world. The fundamental assumption of the caste ideology is that’, “Men were
not — as for classical Confucianism — in principle equal, but for ever unequal.” They were so by birth, and
“were as unlike as man and animal.” The whole society is divided into four major castes : Brahmins,
Kshatrias, Vaishyas and Sudras. The number of sub-castes, however, exceeds 3,000, all of which are
meticulously arranged in a hierarchical social pyramid in which the social grade of each group was fixed
permanently by birth. Each layer in this social pyramid was superior in caste status (Le. virtually in social
status) to all layers below it, and lower in caste status to all the others above it, irrespective of their political or
economic position. The privileges, disabilities, obligations and duties, ie., practically all aspects of social
behaviour of each sub-caste were regulated by fixed rules and codes. At the top were the Brahmins enjoying
every conceivable privilege, and at the bottom were the Sudras, mostly untouchables, doomed to perpetual
serfdom doing all the dirty and disagreeable jobs required of them, with no hope of ever moving up along the
social ladder. The system had religious sanction of the Vedas, and was confirmed by the av/ars of Vishnu,
incarnated as Lord Rama and Krishna. One was born as Sudra as a punishment for sins of one’s previous
birth, and nobody could, therefore, change it. Every varna could perform only the specific functions allotted
to it. Only Brahmins could preside over religious ceremonies. Wearing and use of arms was the monopoly
of Kshatrias. Vaishyas could not do anything except farming and trading. It was a grave offence for a Sudra
to attempt anything other than his menial jobs. Lord Rama, known as Maryada Purshotam, is said to have
cut off the head of a Sudra for the sole crime of indulging in religious rites not allowed to his caste. Lord
Krishna was supposed to have asserted that he was the creator of Chaturvarnya.
It is obvious that religious requirements or creeds of different castes were different. Guru Nanak
draws attention to this anomaly :
The Yogt’s creed in seeking enlightment is expressed.
The Brahmin’s in following the Vedas.
The Kshatria’s creed is heroism; the Sudra’s service of others.”
The Guru, however, does not approve of this. He goes on :
“Should one, however, realise this secret,
One creed all should inspire.
Nanak is a slave to one with such realisation.
In him is manifest the immaculate Lord.
II. THE CONSEQUENCES
Rigid enforcement of the caste system ensured internal stability of the society and control of the
Brahmins for almost three thousand years. The life-negating pacific religious beliefs also helped in this. But
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
an unjust and exploitative system cannot sustain itself indefinitely. The vast majority of the population had
been deprived of education, and had been disarmed. The shabby and cruel treatment meted out to the
Sudras and even the Vaishyas did not inspire or encourage any feelings of sympathy or loyalty to the higher
castes. So when the Muslim invaders started their attacks from the North and West, they met no formidable
resistance. Mahmud Ghaznavi is known for his seventeen invasions on India. It was almost a sport with
him. He would come anytime he liked and return with as much loot as troops could carry. He desecrated
temples, killed people by the thousands and took countless men and women as slaves. His official reporter
recotds that while his troops were plundering the famous temple at Somnath and breaking the idols, people
from the surrounding 300 villages collected and sat chanting mantras, and did not offer any resistance.
Bakhtiar Khilji is believed to have crossed into India with only 300 horsemen, and trampling vast territories,
reached as far as Nalanda, where he demolished the famous university, killing 1,000 teachers and about ten
thousand students, besides destroying over 100,000 valuable manuscripts. Such examples of wanton
destruction by invaders could be cited by hundreds from the Indian history. Muslim invaders were able to
establish their empires in India without much difficulty. Indian pacificism was no match for the life-affirming
approach of the invading armies. The Muslim rule in India lasted for almost a thousand years, only to be
replaced by another foreign power, the British.
Guru Nanak was himself a witness to the attack of the founder of the Mughal Empire in India. In
his famous composition, Babarvani, he gives a very vivid account of the atrocities committed by Babur’s
armies on innocent people, including women and children. He calls Babur’s army a “horde of sin.” At the
same time he takes to task the local rulers for their unpreparedness. He points out the need for forethought
to escape chastisement, as well as the futility of spells for dealing with the Mughal invaders, or any other
ageressor.
III. THE CONCEPT OF SAINT-SOLDIER
We have seen that religious thought of the pre-Guru period was oriented towards development of
the individual, in respect of some selected traits or qualities, rather than his entire personality and the society.
The popular couplet Janani jane to bhagat jan, kai data, Rai sur’ indicates the prevalent values of the times. The
ideals sought were bhakti or generosity or heroism. One of these was considered enough. It never occurred
to religious leaders that emphasise on a single quality would lead to lop-sided development of the individual,
and emaciate the society. Guru Nanak, on the other hand, wanted balanced and fullest development of the
individual, covering every aspect of his life, physical, temporal, moral and spiritual. Himself perfect, he set
out to create a perfect society of perfect individuals, basing his philosophy on the unity of God, the Sole
Loving Creator. This is amply testified by Dr Mohammad Iqbal in his reference to Guru Nanak thus :
Phir uthi Taubid ki awaz ik Punjab se,
Mard-i-kamal ne jagaya Hind ko phir khwab se.4
Then arose from the Punjab the call of Unity of God;
And the perfect man (Guru Nanak) shook Hind from its slumber.
Guru Nanak’s religion derives its origin from his mystic communion with the Sole Loving Creator.
He wanted all human beings to develop in God’s image and to carry out His Altruistic Will.
‘Harijan aisa chahie Hari he jaisa hoe’ (Kabir)
God’s servant should be each as God Himself.
One should, therefore, cherish the attributes of God, some of which are mentioned in the Mu/
Mantra of Guru Nanak as ‘truthfulness’, ‘creativity’, ‘to be above fear or rancout’, etc. God’s image is not cast
in sanitly virtues alone. Guru Arjun hints at the fullness and versatility of His image as follows :
Among kings art Thou reputed as the Supreme King;
Among possessors of land also Supreme.
Among lords art Thou Supreme Lord;
Among the castes Thine is the pre-eminent caste.
My father is the great Master, inaccessible.
Lord Creator, what can we utter of Thy praise ?
In wonder are we beholding all.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Among masters of joy art Thou also supreme;
Supreme Bestower among those that bestow gifts.
Among masters of glory art Thou All-glorious;
Among hedonists the Supreme Hedonist.
Among heroes art Thou Supreme Hero;
among enjoyers of pleasures pre-eminent.
Among householders art Thou Supreme Householder;
among yogis the Supreme Yogi.
Among doers art Thou Supreme Creator;
among upholders of traditions the Supreme Traditionalist.°
The Guru’s system differs radically from earlier religious traditions in its goals. The Guru did not
approve of any selfish goal of personal salvation through asceticism and withdrawal from life, flourishing on
parasitism. The Guru saw God as All Love. He loves His creation, and has a Will that is Altruistic. So the
goal for the Guru’s ideal man or gurmukh is to carry out the Altruistic Will of God. The devotion of the
Gutu’s disciple expresses itself as love for His creation in the form of service and sacrifice. For, love without
sacrifice is meaningless. In fact love and sacrifice are closely linked complimentary qualities. Love of a cause
inevitably leads to sacrifice or heroism. The Guru’s religion, therefore, rejects pacificism of the earlier
salvation systems, and prepares the seeker to be a saint as we// as a soldier, and not a saint ora soldier. He says:
Shouldest thou seek to engage in the game of love,
Step into my street with thy head placed on thy palm.
While on to this stepping, ungrudginely sacrifice your head.®
Guru Arjun repeated the same thing, when he said :
Accept first death as inevitable, and attachment to life discard;
Turn dust of feet of all — thereafter to us come.”
Sikhism is a whole-life system combining spiritual life with empirical life. The sant-sipabi ideal is thus
logically and morally essential. For, love of one’s fellow-men becomes meaningless, and even hypocritical, if
one is not willing to sacrifice and secure for them sustenance, equality, safety and justice in all spheres of life.
Hence in Guru Nanak’s system the ideal of sant-sipahi is spiritually and naturally a necessary culmination. It is,
therefore, neither incidental nor accidental that while the first four Gurus organised, motivated and developed
the Sikh society, and Guru Arjun created a state within a state, the later five Gurus maintained a regular army
and wielded the sword, when necessary.
It must be emphasised that while a Sikh is expected to acquire the skills of a soldier, he is permitted
to use his sword only for a noble cause, to resist oppression and tyranny, and to secure justice and equality for
humanity. Guru Gobind Singh gave a clear sanction to the use of force, when he said :
When all other means (to secure justice) fail,
It is righteous to take the sword in hand.
On the other hand, fighting for selfish ends, self-aggrandisement and lust for power, is condemned in
clear terms. The Guru says :
Call not these heroes that in pride die and bear sufferings :
Blind, not realising the self, in duality are they absorbed.
In extreme of wrath they wage battles.
In this life and the next sufferings.
Declare the scriptures, pride pleases not the Lord.
Those dying in pride, of liberation shall be deprived
And in the cycle of death and birth shall ever move.®
Guru Nanak condemned the invasion of Babur in strongest words, since his exploits were not only
devoid of saintliness, but were actually opposed to it. Dr Iqbal expresses similar sentiments, when he says :
Be it the pomp of monarchy.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Or the show of democracy,
Separate (nobility of) religion from politics,
What remains is the sheer tyranny of Jenghese.?
Guru Arjun stressed the need for saintliness in heroes, when he said :
In this age such alone are designated as true heroes,
As in the love of Lord are dyed.!°
In numerous hymns the Gurus have urged upon the heroes to inculcate saintly qualities. Using
metaphor of wrestling, the Guru refers to the fight with the evil forces thus :
The Lord’s champion am I,
After meeting the Master is my tassel held high.
The tourney of champions assembled.
The Lord Himself is witnessing.
Trumpets and drums are playing;
Champions in the arena are moving around :
Five wrestlers have I overthrown;
The Master my back has stroked.!!
The ideal of saint-soldier is the practical expression of the whole-life approach preached by the
Gurus, who categorically rejected renunciation which is usually associated with saintliness. Guru Arjun says :
Saith Nanak : By contact with the Master is the true device of living perfected.
In a life of smiling playfulness, enjoyment of wear and food,
Is attained liberation.
My self ! in joy abide by endeavouring and working in the way of God.
By meditation obtain union with the Lord:
Thus, saith Nanak, shall thy anxiety be removed.”
IV. FOUNDING A SOCIETY OF SAINT-SOLDIERS
Guru Nanak was not content to merely state his doctrines. He knew that, in the background of the
long Indian tradition, these would be forgotten, unless he could create a motivated and well-knit society,
wedded to his principles and willing to fight for them. With this idea in mind he had been organising sangats,
wherever he went. Towards the end of his tours he created the nucleus of a Sikh society and centre at
Kartarpur, in the form of a colony, in which everybody including the Guru himself, worked and ate together,
attended the daily congregations, and imbibed the spirit of the Master and his religion. The members of this
community were the humble and the lowly people who had suffered for centuries under the Draconian Varna
Dharma and the tyrannical rule of foreign invaders. The infant society had to be nurtured, until it grew in size
and conviction, and developed full consciousness of the strength of its cause and potentialities. All this could
not be achieved overnight or even in one generation. So the Guru introduced the institution of succession,
passing on the torch to his worthiest disciple, Lehna, giving him the name of Angad, Le., a part of his own
self. This succession continued, until it reached the tenth guru, Guru Gobind Singh. Each Guru made rich
contribution to the cause of advancing towards the goal of an organised society of saint-soldiers. The first
five Gurus created the necessary infrastructure like the institution of sangat and pangat, creation of
headquarters at Amritsar, compiling of the Scripture, organisation of districts for efficient administration,
starting the institution of daswandh, developing physical strength of the individual and the society as a whole,
etc.
The Sixth Guru, under instructions of his great father, took the next step to implement the doctrine
of miri-piri by donning two swords at the time of his coronation. He took up in real earnest the training of his
followers in the military skills and warfare. It needs to be noted that the symbol for p77 or spiritualism was
also a sword, and not a rosary, signifying that even spiritual obligations cannot be discharged fully without
shakti ot swotd. In the initial, stages even mercenaries were employed to impart training. For, the earlier
disciples of the Guru, thoroughly grounded in the Sikh doctrines, required training in the arts of soldiery.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
The goal was to create a society of saint-soldiers, properly trained, equipped and willing to fulfil their social
responsibilities to fight and even die for the cause of justice and defence of the poor and oppressed. History
records that the army of Guru Hargobind fought four pitched battles with the forces of the local Mughal
Chiefs, and won. The following three Gurus also maintained armies, approximately thirty thousand strong,
and continued preparing their followers for the ensuing struggle. The ninth guru, Guru Tegh Bahadur, who
died a martyr for resisting the forcible conversion of Hindus to Islam, championing the cause of freedom of
faith, is also famous for his slogan of the saint-soldierly concept.
Frighten not; fear not.'
The first part shows a saint, and the second a soldier.
V. THE EPITOME
The revolutionary movement launched by Guru Nanak, culminated in the creation of the Khalsa by
Guru Gobind Singh on the Vaisakhi day of 1699, when he dramatically selected the Panj Piaras, the most
devoted of his Sikhs or disciples, who had offered their heads to the Guru for the saintly cause, to form the
nucleus of the Khalsa Pan/b. Around this nucleus under the inspiring leadership of the Guru and the example
of his unparalleled sacrifices, grew a society of saint-soldiers, with strong convictions of the spiritual realities
of life, wedded to the highest moral values, trained in the arts of soldiering, and ever willing and prepared to
fight for the cause of justice, in defence of the poor, the oppressed and the downtrodden. The exploits of the
Khalsa are too well-known to need mention in this brief paper. Suffice it to say that it was this organisation
of saint-soldiers, that stemmed the spate of invasions from the North-West that had plagued India for nearly
a thousand years, and introduced an era of peace, stability, freedom and human dignity after centuries of
tyranny, destruction, slavery, humiliation and indignity.
VI. THE SAINT-SOLDIER IN HISTORY
The history of Sikhs after creation of the Khalsa is the story of an unending series of martyrs and
saint-soldiers, who staked their lives for the cause of justice and resistance to oppression and exploitation. It
is beyond the scope of this paper to go into details of such heroic deeds and near miracles performed by the
Khalsa. One of the numerous examples, recorded by Rattan Singh Bhangoo in his Panth Parkash, is the attack
on Kasur, on the complaint of a Brahmin whose wife had been forcibly taken away by the ruling Pathans.
The attack was undertaken against heavy odds, with a meagre 24,000 soliders against an enemy over a /akh
strong, involving tremendous risk. With conviction of the righteousness of the cause, and with faith in God,
the attack was launched, because the Khalsa could not resist the call to duty as saint-soldiers. A mere saint of
earlier traditions, would have paid little attention to the Brahmin’s request, and would have advised him to
accept it as the will of Providence. And a mere soldier would see no need or justification for such a risky
operation. But the saint-soldiers of the Guru did not shirk their responsibility and succeeded in rescuing the
Brahmin’s wife at a heavy cost in terms of loss of life.
“Every page of Sikh history burns with a hundred star-like names; one name is enough to thrill a
whole life in us with the noblest spirit of heroism. The names of Guru Arjun Dev, Guru Tegh Bahadur,
Guru Gobind Singh, his Four Sons, the five Beloved Disciples, and of the Sikh martyrs and devotees, the
heroes of war and peace, provide the Sikh with an inexhaustible and intense past which few races in history
can provide in its life-giving, death defying powers of inspiration to serve the Master and His ideals!’’!4
Among the countless heroes, mention may also be made of the Forty Muktas, Baba Banda Singh Bahadur,
Baba Dip Singh, Bhai Mehtab Singh, Bhai Sukha Singh, Nawab Kapur Singh, Maharaja Jassa Singh, Akali
Phula Singh and others. Outstanding among the more recent saint-soldiers are the names of Bhai Sahib
Randhir Singh and Baba Waisakha Singh, who spent their lives in jail for resisting the oppression of the
British rule in India in response to the inner call for action as disciples of the Guru.
The spirit of saint-soldiers lives and will live for ever. The Akali Movement of the early twenties
furnished ample evidence of this spirit. Professor Puran Singh makes a touching reference to this as follows :
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
The awe-inspiring scenes of the “Akalis” in their present somewhat confused struggle, however
misled and misguided from certain points of view — counting death like moths, the Sikh women coming
and garlanding their husbands before the Akal Takht to go and bare their breasts to bullets if need be, in the
name of the Guru; mothers and fathers putting with their own hands the flaming crown of martyrdom on
their young sons’ heads and praying that the Guru may grant them the honour of death in His Name; people
laying themselves down on railroads before the rushing railway engines, carrying a trainful of their brethren as
prisoners, as an appeal for stopping the train to let them who are out of prison to feast those who are going
in; thousands dressed in yellow and black, vying with each other to be the first to form the groups of five
hundred or a thousand martyrs that are sent to face prison, torture and even death in the name of the Guru;
and the universal diffusion of this one feeling of service and sacrifice throughout the Sikh masses — these
make one wonder if one is living in an age of rank materialism as the present one, or in the age when under
the direct inspiration of the Tenth Guru the Sikhs were taking the vows of absolute self-surrender to the
Ideals of the Khalsa.!5
VI. CONCLUSION
The concept of saint-soldier is clearly traceable to Guru Nanak, who made a radical departure from
the earlier pacific and personal salvation-oriented religious thought. Guru Nanak preached a positive
approach to the world, and a whole-life religion, with emphasis on altruistic activity and righteous deeds,
based on the highest moral values. He wanted a balanced development of the individual to create a perfect
man or ‘the man in all men’ that he himself was.
The Gutu’s vision went far beyond the individual. He wanted to create a perfect society, and took
positive steps towards that end. He envisaged a society of God-men living as householders in the midst of
the social milieu, engaged in pursuits of daily life, discharging with a sense of responsibility their social and
political functions, committed to carry out the Altruistic Will of the Loving Creator, and willing and ever
ptepared to resist oppression and fight injustice. That was his concept of the Ideal Man combining spiritual
and empirical values, the saint-soldier, and a perfect society of such individuals. Under his successors the idea
flourished and advanced towards the most fitting epitome of the creation of the Khalsa under Guru Gobind
Singh. That was indeed the final event, on the Vaisakhi of 1699, the greatest day in the history of mankind.
For, the socio-spiritual ideal of saint-soldier is the highest ideal that has ever been given to mankind.
REFERENCES
1. Guru Granth Sahib : Mahila-5, pp. 641-42, (Trans. Talib).
2. Jagjit Singh : Perspectives on Sikh Studies, p. 14, Guru Nanak Foundation, New Delhi.
3. Guru Granth Sahib : Asa di Var, M-1, p. 469.
4. Mohammad Iqbal : Bang-i-dara.
5. Guru Granth Sahib : Gari M-5, p. 507.
6. Ibid., p. 1412.
7. Ibid., Var Gauri, M-5, p. 1102.
8. Ibid., Var Maru, M-3, p. 1089.
9. Mohammad Iqbal: Bang-i-dara.
10. Guru Granth Sahib, Dhanasari, M-5, p. 679.
11. Ibid., Siri Rag, M-5, p. 74.
12. Ibid., M-5, p. 522.
13. Ibid, Sloka M-9, p. 1427.
14. Puran Singh : Spirit of the Sikh, Part I, p. 9.
15. Ibid., p. 8.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
11
SIKHISM : AN ORIGINAL, DISTINCT, REVEALED
AND COMPLETE RELIGION
HARNAM SINGH SHAN
The word ‘Sikh’, as we know, is the Punjabised form of the Sanskrit word shishya, meaning a disciple
or a learner, especially a seeker of truth. It came to be used for the disciples of Guru Nanak Dev and his nine
spiritual successors who graced humanity from 1469 to 1708 A.D. in the Indian subcontinent. Thus, their
religion, called Sikhism, literally means the path of discipleship and the new way of life taught by them.
Their faith is the youngest and the most modern of the world’s religions. It originated in Punjab, the
land of Five Rivers, about five centuries ago, during the Muslim rule of Lodhis followed soon after by that of
the Mughals in India.
II
Soon after the passing away, in 1708, of the Tenth Master, Guru Gobind Singh, the Mughal
Emperor, Bahadur Shah, issued an imperial ordinance on the 10th of December 1710 from Delhi to “kill and
finish them (the Sikhs) wherever they were found,”! ordering thus their wholesale destruction. That royal
proclamation, outlawing the Sikhs and seeking their complete annihilation, was repeated by Emperor Farrukh
Siyar, and it remained in force for three long years in all parts of the Mughal Empire. “According to it, every
Sikh or Nanakpanthi, wherever seen, was to be immediately arrested. He was to be offered only one
alternative, either Islam or the sword. He was to be executed there and then without any hesitation or loss of
time. A schedule of valuable rewards was proclaimed. For every Sikh head Rs. 25/- were to be given, and
for a Sikh captive a sum of Rs. 100/- was to be awarded. Their pretty girls were to be reduced to concubines,
and others were to be made maid-servants. When a Muslim died, his grave was to be dug by the Sikhs or
their Hindu sympathisers. For begar (unpaid labour), in place of cobblers, Sikhs were to be employed. The
Emperor’s ordets were strictly obeyed. The Governors of Sarhind, Lahore and Jammu tried to surpass one
another in persecution of the Sikhs in order to win the goodwill of Farrukh Styar.”? Later, in 1746, according
to Syed Mohammad Latif, “The Governor (of Punjab), Yahya Khan, issued a proclamation for a general
massacre of all Sikhs, wherever they could be found. Death was to be the punishment of all persons who
invoked the name of Guru Gobind (Singh), and a reward was offered for the heads of Sikhs. Thousands
were put to death daily, and their heads brought before the Subedar of Lahore for reward.”> It was reported,
on three occasions, to the authorities that the Sikhs had been exterminated root-and-branch. The Afghan
invader, Ahmad Shah Abdali, during his invasion of India in 1762 and his continued campaign of the Sikhs’
extermination, killed about twenty five thousand of them* in a single day’s battle.5 Besides, he ransacked
their capital (viz. Amritsar), blew up their Harimandar (the Temple of God, better known as Golden Temple),
and desecrated its Sadhasar (sacred pool) with blood, bones and entrails of cows, etc., and had it filled up with
debris.°
With the establishment, in 1849, of the British rule in Punjab, Dr Ernest Trumpp, a German
missionary, appointed by Her Majesty’s Government to translate the sacred Sikh scriptures, asserted in 1877
that “Sikhism is a waning religion that will soon belong to history.”’ Joginder Nath Bhattacharya rather
prophesied in 1896 that “Under British rule, Sikhism is fast losing its vitality and is drifting towards
amalgamation with the Hindu faith. In the course of a few more generations, Sikhism is likely to be
superseded by one of those forms of Vaishnavism which alone have the best chance of success among a
subject nation in times of profound and undisturbable peace.’ Max Arthur Macauliffe also apprehended
such a danger of amalgamation or absorption, when he observed, first in his essays and papers (1881-1906),°
and later in his magnum opus (1909) : “Truly wonderful are the strength and vitality of Hinduism. It is like the
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
boa constrictor of the Indian forests. When a petty enemy appears to worty it, it winds round its opponent,
crushes it in its folds, and finally causes it to disappear in its capacious interior. In this way, many centuries
ago, Hinduism on its own ground disposed of Buddhism which was largely a Hindu reformation; in this way,
in a pre-historic period, it absorbed the religion of the Scythian invaders of Northern India; in this way, it is
disposing of the reformed and once hopeful religion of Baba Nanak. Hinduism has embraced Sikhism in its
folds; the still comparatively young religion is making a vigorous struggle for life, but its ultimate destruction
is, it is apprehended, inevitable without state support.”!° Gokul Chand Narang posing a self-prophetising
question and answering it himself in a self-righteous manner, stated in 1912, “What is their (the Sikhs) future
? Itis anything but dark. However, it is apparent that the best days of the Khalsa are altogether behind.”"!
During the all-out crusade of extermination against its adherents (who are easily recognizable by their
strikingly distinctive appearance sporting unshorn hair and colourful headgear) immediately before and after
the partition of India and the creation of Pakistan on the 15th August 1947, thousands of them (the Sikhs)
were killed at sight. The rest were uprooted, ew masse, from their homes, lands and historic shrines; and were
deprived of all other belongings in an unprecedented way.'?
The horrendous holocaust reduced nearly half of their thriving community to a homeless, landless
and seething refugee population. So much so that of all other persons, one of its own followers, Khushwant
Singh, while prefacing his first book about them and their faith, observed in 1953 : “The chief reason for my
writing an account of my people is the melancholy thought that contemporary with my labours are being
written the last chapters of the story of the Sikhs. By the end of the century, the Sikhs themselves will have
passed into oblivion. Before that happens, it is proper that some estimate of their religion, history, traditions
and political and cultural achievements should be made by someone identified with them by faith and
association.”!3 Gokul Chand Narang, a staunch Arya-Samajist, came out in 1960 with another self-fulfilling
statement asserting that the “Sikhs have no political future as an independent community.”'* Fourteen years
later, another highly learned Sikh, Kapur Singh, stated while concluding his speech on 7th of October 1974 at
Vancouver : “While as Canadian citizens, the Sikhs may look forward to a hopeful and bright future; in India,
their historic homeland, they now face the basic problems of their identity and existence, since the control of
their own history has been snatched out of their own hands and their historical potential has been submerged
and throttled. And I add that the Sikhs want to live, as all living things do not want to die.”
Only ten years after that last pronouncement, the Sikhs had to face still another holocaust in 1984,
only thirty-seven years after the independence of India; for the attainment of which their sufferings, sacrifices
and contribution far exceeded their numerical strength in their motherland.'° This too involved not only a
multi-pronged attack on their historic shrines and institutions,'’ but also a genocidal campaign to slaughter
thousands of innocent Sikhs, disgracing their women and burning their properties all over India, not
accounted for to this date.!8
But in spite of such recurrent persecution and treacherous onslaughts perpetrated on this religion by
the rulers and the foreign invaders as well as the ongoing challenges and intimidating prophesies about its
absorption, assimilation or disappearance, Sikhism has stood its ground and withstood all tests of the time.
All nefarious efforts made from time-to-time to suppress, subjugate or exterminate it have gone up in smoke.
All prophets of doom who predicted its extinction had to bite the bullet and their prophesies have proven
totally wrong. Even “the boa constrictor has failed to swallow it,”!9 The fact remains that it has not only
survived, but is very much here to stay. Its followers are flourishing now in even larger numbers, not only in
Punjab, its home-land, and in all other parts of India, but also in every part of the world. Despite various
limitations, such as their ‘stateless status’ — the Sikhs have achieved a far greater success in all walks of life,
contributing a lot to the progress of the communities they live in and wielding “an influence much in excess
of their numerical strength’2? everywhere in the world. So much so that according to the renowned
historian Arnold Toynbee, “they are the burliest men on the face of the planet, tough and capable, and
slightly grim. If human life survives the present chapter of man’s history, the Sikhs for sure, will still be on
the map.”?!
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
III
This is so and shall remain thus; because the Sikhs, in spite of being about 2% of the population of
India, their country of origin, profess one of the ‘higher religions’ of the World which is not only an original,
distinct and independent faith, but is also an autonomous, complete and dynamic religion, born of a direct
and definitive revelation like other major religions of the world. It is primary in its source and pure in its
contents.
The authenticity of its dogmas, simplicity of its beliefs, exalted moral code, internal vigour, tenacity
of purpose and sustained heroism together with the religious zeal, spiritual energy, unshakable faith and
indomitable spirit as well as the enterprising and self-sacrificing nature of its followers have kept it intact and
firm on its ground in many such crises during its 500 plus year-old history, raising it up again with greater
strength and better prospects after every attempt to annihilate it.
IV
Those who have not been able to study Sikhism properly or objectively, or have been unable to
understand rightly its nature, origin, essence, psyche and spirit, have often described it wrongly or
misleadingly.
Some of them, like Estlin Carpenter, have considered it not an original and distinct, but an eclectic
and ‘composed’ religion, maintaining that “the movement of Nanak which culminated in the formation of a
kind of church nation, was fed from two sources and attempted to establish a religion combining the higher
elements of Hinduism and Islam alike.” According to Rev. F. Heiler, too, it is “a pure and elevated religion
in which the best of Hinduism and the best of Islam unite ...... Many elements of the religion ...... come near
the central truths of Christianity, though these glimpses of revelation are indeed blurred by the strong
influence of Vedantic pantheism and Islamic fatalism. Above all, the element which robs the teaching of the
Granth (its sacred scripture, Guru Granth Sahib) of any creative power is its eclecticism, its continued
oscillation between theism and pantheism.’”?3 In the words of Khushwant Singh, “Sikhism was born out of a
wedlock between Hinduism and Islam.”%4 It is “a synthesis of these two faiths.”%5 According to
Bhattacharya, it may be described briefly as a Hinduized form of Mahomedanism or a Mahomedinized form
of Hinduism, ...... is a mixture of Hinduism and Mahomedanism minus circumcision and cow-killing, and plus
faith in the Sikh Gurus. Even in outward appearance, a Sikh with his short trousers, flowing beard, forehead
free from paint and neck without beads, looks more like a Mohamedan than a Hindu. The only visible sign
by which he may be distinguished is the iron ring which he wears on the wrist.”° The Time magazine has
recently described him as “a member of a casteless religion that combines elements of Hinduism and Islam,
but scorns the caste system of the Hindus and the historical expansionism of the Muslims.”’
Some others, like Frederic Pincott, have also tried to identify Sikhism with Muhammadanism.
According to him, “the religion of Nanak was really intended as a compromise between Hinduism and
Muhammadanism, if it may not even be spoken of as the religion of a Mohammadan.” Concluding his article
on Sikhism, included in the Dictionary of Islam, he observed, “It is enough for the purpose of this article to
have established the fact that Sikhism, in its inception, was intimately associated with Muhammadanism; and
that it was intended as a means of bridging the gulf which separated the Hindus from the believers in the
Prophet.”?8 Tara Chand has even gone to the extent of asserting that “Nanak took the Prophet of Islam as
his model and his teaching was naturally deeply coloured by this fact.’
Sti Rajagopalachari has described the Sikhs as “no better than uncircumcised Mussalmans.’’?
Ascribing the theistic character of Sikhism to the influence of Islam, Monier Williams has stated, “Nanak was
partially Islamised, to the extent at least of denouncing idolatry.”3! G.T. Battany has also mentioned this
religion “having been largely influenced by the growing Mohammadanism.’2 But the Muslim writers, like
Maulvi Insha Ulla Khan,*? Maulvi Muhammad Ali,>* Khawaja Hasan Nizami,*> and Shaikh Muhammad
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Yasuf,° have gone a step further even by claiming Guru Nanak as a great Muslim Fakir who, according to
them, taught a religion which in itself was a form of Muhammadanism.*’
On the other hand, according to Ernest Trumpp, “Sikhism has only an accidental relationship with
Muhammadanism. It is a mistake if Nanak is represented as having endeavoured to unite the Hindu and
Muhammadan idea about God. Nanak remained a thorough Hindu according to all his views.’”8 “Although
precipitated by Islam,” asserts Gokul Chand Narang, “Sikhism owes nothing to that religion. It is, on the
other hand, a phase of Hindu religious revival, and has in consequence retained all essential features of real
Hinduism.’° Mahatma Gandhi has even claimed that the “Sikhs are a part of the Hindu community. The
Granth Sahib is filled with the Hindu spirit and the Hindu legends, and millions of Hindus believe in Guru
Nanak.’’*? Gandhi, records Archer, “acknowledged that he had met some Sikhs who held themselves distinct
from Hindus, but intimated that he would be pleased to find that the separate tendency is confined to only a
very few Sikhs and that the general body regard themselves as Hindus,’*! thus paving the way for Sikhism to
be labelled as an off-shoot of Hinduism.
There are still others who, like Muhammad Akbar, have even denied the distinct identity and separate
entity of Sikhism by asserting that “Guru Nanak did not enunciate any new religion, but only wanted to
reform Hinduism.”#2 According to Guru Datt also, it is difficult to say whether Sikhs have any separate or
distinct religion of their own. The faith they profess is the basis of the present-day Arya-Samaj.43 Nirad C.
Chaudhuri has also identified Sikhism with Hinduism and has described it as one of its different forms.“
According to some others, like Marian Smith, Sikhism is a religious synthesis. She “finds a similarity
between the reforms of Guru Nanak and those of Martin Luther. She calls Sikhism a religious synthesis,
pointing out that Guru Nanak offered a doctrinal synthesis which answered the challenge of Islam, and aimed
at the foundations of the top-heavy Brahminical social structure.”
Vv
But those who have studied Sikhism and have understood its origin, growth and gospel have
proclaimed, in the words of Duncan Greenlees, the celebrated author of the World Gospel Series, that “Sikhism
is no disguised Hindu sect, but an independent revelation of the Truth of all sects; it is no variant of Muslim
teaching ...... It too is a distinct religion like the other great religions of the world ...... The Sikh is not a Hindu
ot a Muslim; he is the disciple of the one Eternal Guru.”4 According to Edward Bittencourt, “Sikhism is a
wholly new, original and genuinely monotheistic religion. It is an independent religion which naturally may
be said to have a background of Hinduism and Islam, much as Christianity has a background of Judaism, and
Judaism has a background of Akhnatonism and Zoroastrianism and previous Semitic Paganism.’’4’ M.A.
Macauliffe, who devoted thirty long years to its study and research and produced a six-volume monumental
work about its prophets, scripture, tradition, etc., had already stated, while introducing to the West this
religion and its founder as follows : “Guru Nanak was not a priest either by birth or education, but a man
who soared to the loftiest heights of divine emotionalism, and exalted his mental vision to an ethical ideal
beyond the conception of Hindu or Muhammadan. The illustrious author of ze de Jesus asks whether great
originality will again arise, or the world be content to follow the path opened by the daring creators of ancient
ages. Now there is here presented a religion totally unaffected by Semitic or Christian influences. Based on
the concept of the unity of God, it rejected Hindu formulations and adopted an independent ethical system,
ritual, and standards, which were totally opposed to theological beliefs of Guru Nanak’s age and countty.’’48
Hence, he asserted, “It would be difficult to point to a religion of greater originality or to a more
comprehensive ethical system.”4? According to R.C. Majumdar too, the founder of this new and distinct
religion, “cut himself adrift from all associations with prevailing sectarian religions.’*°
It even fell away from allegiance to their respective codes, and developed its own, as observed by Sir
Lepel Griffin in 1870 : “The Sikhs had abandoned the Hindu faith, and with it the system of law which is the
basis of the faith and which was inseparable from it. For a hundred and fifty years they had been governed,
as far as chiefships were concerned, by another code altogether, and it was as reasonable for them to refer to
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Manu and the Shastras as the source of legal authority, as it would have been for Muhammadans who had
embraced Sikhism to appeal to the shariat.”>! So much so, that, in the words of Prof. Indubhushan Banerjee,
it “forged its own weapon, hedged itself behind newer forms and customs, in short, developed individuality
of its own.’°?
And this is what Guru Arjun Dev, the holy compiler of its sacred scripture, Guru Granth Sahib, has
himself stated in unambiguous terms as long back as in 1604 A.D. :
“T observe neither fasting (like a Hindu),
nor the month of austerity (like a Muslim).
For I serve God alone,
Who saves all at the last.
Gosain of the Hindus and Allah of the Muslims are one to me.
I have broken free from Hindus as from Muslims.
Neither I go to Mecca to perform Hajj (like Muslims),
nor I perform worship at pilgrim places of Hindus.
I serve only the sole Lord (i-e., God) and no other.
I neither perform the Hindu worship,
nor say the Muslim prayer.
I bow to the One Formless Lord in my heart.
We are neither Hindus nor Musalmans,
Our body and soul belong to the One Supreme Being,
Who alone is both Ram and Allah for us. >
A contemporary historian, Mobid Zulfigar Ardistani (popularly known as Shaikh Mohsin Fani), who
happened to stay with his son and successor, Guru Hargobind, at Kiratpur Sahib, and who had been the first
non-Sikh writer to record an account of the Sikhs and Sikhism of those days, and that too based on first-hand
information, has recorded his statement in his famous work on comparative study of religions, entitled
Dabistan-i-Mazahib, compiled in 1654 A.D. Opening his chapter on the subject, Mohsin Fani observes : “the
Nanak Panthis who ate known as the Sikhs of the Gurus, have no faith in idols and temples of idols.’
Proceeding further, he states “They do not read the mantras of the Hindus. They do not venerate their
temples or idols, nor do they esteem their atars. They have no regard for the Sanskrit language, which,
according to the Hindus, is the speech of the angels.” Indicating Guru Nanak’s own attitude towards avéars
and divinities, he tells that Guru Nanak did not believe in divinities and incarnations. “Just as he praised the
Mohammadans, so has he praised the incarnations and the gods and goddesses of the Hindus. But, he
considered them all to be the created (makhiug) and not the Creator (kbalig). He denied the doctrines of
Hatool (i.e. direct descent from or incarnation of God), and It#zbad (1.e., direct union of the All-pervading God
with any particular body).
Bhai Gurdas, the amanuensis who wrote the Holy Granth at the dictation of Guru Arjun, was
himself a great scholar and writer, and his ballads and couplets are regarded as the ‘key’ to the understanding
of the Sikh scriptures, tenets, practices, etc., has categorically stated : The Guru’s Panth is distinct. And
cannot be mixed with others.*’
Basing his conclusion on numerous references and statements contained therein, Owen Cole has,
therefore, observed, “Hinduism at all levels is rejected and replaced by the practices which have come to be
the essential part of Sikh ceremonial use of the Adi Granth and celebration of the anniversaries of the Gurus
(gurpurbs).”>®
Qazi Nur Muhammad who came to India from Baluchistan in the invader’s train to record the events
of the seventh (dt. 1764) invasion of Ahmad Shah Abdali, and who completed his “invaluable”®? Jang Namah
in 1765, has also expressed similar views which are based upon his personal observations and close contacts.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Speaking of the religion of the Sikhs against whom the said expedition had been organised, Nur Muhammad
tells us that religiously they were absolutely separate from Hindus :
“The Sikhs are the disciples of the Guru, and that august Guru lived at Chak (Amritsar). The ways
and manners of these people received their impetus from Nanak who showed those Sikhs a separate path
(ie., taught them a distinct religion). He was succeeded by Gobind Singh from whom they received the title
of ‘Singh.’ They are not from amongst the Hindus, and have a separate religion of their own.”
J.D. Cunningham (1812-1851), who happened to be the first-ever Westerner to write and publish in
1849 the first full-fledged history of Sikhism after fighting fierce and decisive battles with its followers,
therefore, observed in 1849 : “The last apostle of the Sikhs did not live to see his own ends accomplished, but
he effectually roused the dormant energies of a vanquished people, and filled them with a lofty, although
fitful, longing for social freedom and national ascendancy, the proper adjuncts of that purity of worship
which had been preached by Nanak. Gobind saw what was yet vital, and he relumed it with Promethean
fire.’ The result of the miracle that the Tenth Master wrought, tells Cunningham, is that, “A living spirit
possesses the whole Sikh people, and the impress of (Guru) Gobind (Singh) has not only elevated and altered
the constitution of their minds, but has also operated materially and given amplitude to their physical frames.
The features and external form of a whole people have been modified, and a Sikh Chief is not more
distinguishable by his stately person and free and manly bearing than a minister of his faith is by a lofty
thoughtfulness of look which marks the fervours of his soul, and his persuasion of the near presence of the
Divinity.” Asserting that the people marked by such high spirits and changed features belonged to a distinct
faith, altogether different even from that of their other countrymen, Cunningham added : “Notwithstanding
these changes, it has been usual to regard the Sikhs as essentially Hindus, and they doubtless are so in
language and everyday customs, for Gobind (Singh) did not fetter his disciples with political systems or codes
of municipal laws; yet in religious faith and worldly aspirations they are wholly different from other Indians,
and they are bound together by a community of inward sentiment and outward object unknown elsewhere.
But the misapprehension need not surprise the public nor condemn our scholars, when it is remembered that
the learned Greeks and Romans misunderstood the spirit of those humble men who obtained a new life by
baptism. Tacitus and Suetonius regarded the early Christians as a mere Jewish sect, they failed to perceive the
fundamental difference and to appreciate the latent energy and real excellence of that doctrine which has
added dignity and purity to the modern civilization.”*! Sir Charles Elliot acclaimed it, therefore, as “a religion
of special interest (to mankind), since it has created not only a political society, but also customs so distinctive
that those who profess it, rank in common esteem as a separate race.? Guru Gobind Singh’s “ordinances”,
he added, “were successful in creating a nation.”
Recognizing and acclaiming this amazing fact of history, the Sage-Scholar of Pondicherry, Sir
Aurobindo, has similarly observed : “A more striking instance was the founding of the Sikh religion, its long
line of Gurus and the novel direction and form given to it by Guru Gobind Singh in the democratic
institution of Khalsa.’ Explaining it earlier, he has stated : “The Sikh Khalsa was an astonishingly original
and novel creation, and its face was turned not to the past but to the future.’ Nirmal Kumar Jain has
likewise asserted that those who consider this religion as an off-shoot of Islam “are as mistaken as those who
think Sikhism to be an off-shoot of Hinduism. Like every original religion, it is born of a direct revelation. It
is not based on any scripture. As it does not derive from any established creed, it does not fight any
preceding religion.”® In the same vein, maintains Ishwari Prasad that “Guru Nanak declared that there was
no Hindu or Mussalman. He set aside the Vedas and the Quran, and asked his followers to repeat the name
of God.’’*” Hence, said Dorothy Field, “Pure Sikhism is far above dependence on Hindu ritual. A reading of
the Granth strongly suggests that Sikhism should be regarded as a new and separate world religion, rather
than a reformed sect of the Hindus.°
It is similarly not a sect or a form of Muhammadanism. It is neither a mixture of both nor a
compilation of good points selected from the Hindu and Muslim faiths. It has not been formed, as alleged
above, by combining some rational and acceptable rituals, beliefs and dogmas of the Hindus and Muslims.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
“The teachings of Guru Nanak have,” says Geoffrey Parrinder, the eminent author of the World Religions,
“commonly been represented as a syncretic blend of Hindu tradition and Muslim belief. This is a gross
simplification, and when expressed in terms of a mixture of Hinduism and Islam, it must be totally rejected.
The teachings of Guru Nanak do indeed represent a synthesis, but the elements which constitute the
synthesis can never be defined, however loosely, as Hinduism and Islam.” Thus, Sikhism can, in no way, be
termed as an eclectic religion, composed of selections made from various systems, doctrines, sources, etc.
The order of the Khalsa “from its very birth has claimed the status of a new Way of Life, the Third
Panth, a separate community, and distinct people from the two Ways of Life, already known and largely
practised by the peoples of East and West and the inhabitants of India : the Way of the Aryans, represented
by Hinduism and its heterodox forms, Buddhism and Jainism; and the Semitic Way of Life, represented
primarily by the Christians and the Mussulmans.”” “That such was the unambiguous claim made for his new
otder of the Khalsa by the Guru (Gobind Singh) himself, cannot be in doubt, as the Guru’s own assertions
on this point amply support the testimony of the contemporary non-Sikh historians and writers.”7!
This is also quite clear from the proclamation he made in the great gathering of the Sikhs at
Anandpur Sahib soon after initiating the first ftve members of the Order of the Khalsa, knighting them as
Singhs and calling them his Beloved Ones, on the historic Vaisakhi day of the 30th March, 1699. “According
to the Persian historian Ghulam Muhi-ud-Din, the newswriter of the period, sent to the Emperor
(Aurangzeb) a copy of the Guru’s address (which) is dated the first of Vaisakh Samvat 1756 (A.D. 1699), and
is as follows””? :
“T wish you all to embrace one creed and follow one path, rising above all differences of the religions
as now practised. Let the four Hindu castes, who have different rules laid down for them in the Shastras,
abandon them altogether, and adopting the way of mutual help and co-operation, mix freely with one
another. Let no one deem himself superior to another. Do not follow the old scriptures. Let none pay heed
to the Ganga and other places of pilgrimage which are considered to be holy in the Hindu religion, or
worship the Hindu deities such as Rama, Krishna, Brahma and Durga; but all should cherish faith in the
teachings of Guru Nanak and his successors. Let men of the four castes recetve my baptism (of the Double-
edged Sword). Eat of the same vessel, and feel no aloofness from or contempt for one another.’
The newswriter of the Mughal Court who was present there on the occasion, when forwarding this
proclamation to his master, submitted his own report : “When the Guru had thus addressed the crowd,
several Brahmins and Khatris stood up, and said that they accepted the religion of Guru Nanak and of the
other Gurus. Others, on the contrary, said that they would never accept any religion which was opposed to
the teachings of the Vedas and the Shastras, and that they would not renounce at the bidding of a boy, the
ancient faith which had descended to them from their ancestors. Thus, though several refused to accept the
Guru’s religion, about twenty thousand men stood up and promised to obey him, as they had the fullest faith
in his divine mission.””4
About eighty thousand men, say Ahmad Shah Batalia and Bute Shah, received the Baptism of the
Double-edged Sword and joined the Order of the Khalsa during the first few days. Their names were
changed, and “they were given one family name ‘Singh’ for thenceforth their father was Gobind Singh (so
renamed after his own baptism), their mother Sahib Devan, and their place of birth Anandpur. The baptism
symbolised a rebirth, by which the initiated renounced their previous occupations (Ait nash) for that of
working for God; severed their family ties (Ru/ nash) to become the family of Gobind; rejected their earlier
creeds (dharma nash) for the creed of the Khalsa; gave up all rituals (karam nash) save that sanctioned by the
Sikh faith; and stopped beliving in superstition (bharam nash) for belief in One God. Five emblems were
prescribed for the Khalsa. They were to wear their hair and beard unshorn (kesh); they were to carry a comb
(kangha) in the hair to keep it tidy; they were always to wear a knee-length pair of breeches (Rach), worn by
soldiers of the times; they were to carry a steel bangle (Aara) on their right wrist; and they were to be ever
armed with a sabre (Airpan). In addition to these five emblems, the converts were to observe four rules of
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
conduct (rahi?) : not to cut any hair on any part of their body; not to smoke or chew tobacco, or consume
alcoholic drinks; not to eat an animal which had been slaughtered by being bled to death, as was customary
with the Muslims, but eat only jhatka meat, where the animal had been despatched with one blow, and not to
molest the person of Muslim women. At the end of oathtaking, the Guru hailed the converts with a new
form of greeting :
Waheguru ji ka Khalsa
Waheguru ji ki Fateh
“Hail the Khalsa who belongs to Lord God !
Hail the Lord God to Whom belongs the victory |”
The very first ordinance issued by the Founder of the Khalsa to the Sikh congregations throughout
the subcontinent, Kabul and Ghazni confirms the above,” and his definition of the Khalsa corroborates all
that further as under in his own words :
“He whose mind dwells, night and day,
On the Ever-effulgent Light,
And never swerves from the thought of one God;
He who is full of love for God and faith in Him,
And believes not, even mistakenly,
In fasting and worship of the graves of Muslims
Or sepulchres of Hindus;
He who recognises the one God and not another,
And does not believe in pilgrimages,
Ceremonial acts of mercy
And charity, penances and austerities;
And he whose heartt is illumined within
By the Light of the Perfect One,
He is to be recognised then
As a pure member of the Order of the Khalsa.’
All that ushered in a complete break with the past of all those who joined the Order of the Khalsa.
It also marked “the culmination which had crowned Guru Nanak’s revelation.” It also pronounced the
complete independence and distinctiveness of the Sikh religion. “That such has been the stout belief, and the
basic impulse of the Sikhs and their history can be readily ascertained by any dispassionate person who would
take pains to enquire with an open mind.’’®? He or she would surely come to a similar conclusion.
Further authentication to this stance has been duly provided by John Clark Archer, who, after
conducting a critical and comparative study of the Aryan and Semitic religions and recognising the separate
entity and identity of Sikhism, has maintained that, “Indeed Sikhism in itself reveals something of what in the
last analysis religion is ...... ” It is “an independent and conspicuous order of its own, with a character worthy
of comparison with that of Hinduism and Islam, and with Christianity in particular ...... The five centuries of
Sikh history provide many lessons in human thought and action which are of more than passing value ......
Sikhs may stand, therefore, as symbols and examples of all who search for God and Truth ...... They preserve
among themselves a hardy tradition of religious and political activity, and enjoy among Hindus, Moslems,
Christians and other peoples, an extraordinary prestige.”*! The dispassionate enquirer would also find like an
American convert, Ralph Singh, that the followers of this distinct faith “have their own Prophets who
brought a new divine revelation to earth which is enshrined in their own sacred scripture, Guru Granth Sahib,
regarded as the living Word of God.’’®? But, a biased enquirer, like Hew McLeod, who has, according to
Justice Gurdev Singh “attacked most of the Sikh traditions, institutions and beliefs, questioned their validity
and striven to create doubts about others,’§ would, on the other hand, maintain on flimsy props and
erroneous conclusions that “Sikhism does not deserve much consideration as it is only a rehash of a minor
effete Hindu creed” and that Guru Nanak was not the founder of this religion “as he did not originate a new
school of thought or set of teachings.”” McLeod has even gone to the extent of choosing not to accept the
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
aforesaid account of the birth of the Khalsa and the five emblems and rules of conduct prescribed for it by
Guru Gobind Singh himself on the Vaisakhi of 1699, “not because he finds any evidence to falsify it, but by
simply refusing to believe it,’ saying, “Our knowledge of this (18th) century is still limited. Traditions
abound, but so too do compulsive reasons for scepticism. What we do know, however, indicates that
traditions relating to the period of Guru Gobind Singh must be, in some considerable measure, set aside.
The slate must be wiped clean and must not be reinscribed until we have ascertained just what did take place
during the eighteenth century.”*4
VI
But the history and tradition of a religion cannot, and should not be “set aside,” “discarded” or
“wiped clean” on the mere suspicions or unjustified scepticism of an ex-employee of a Christian Mission.
Such scepticism is unwarranted particularly in the case of a religion, viz. Sikhism, which was born just about
five centuries back and which has survived so gloriously through this eventful period of the modern world in
full gaze of history. More so, when it has been duly recognised not only as an original and distinct, but also as
an independent and autonomous higher religion of the world.
Besides, as already stated, this is a prophetic religion. It is born of a direct and definitive revelation
like all other great and ‘higher religions’ of the world, “Instead of drawing authority and inspiration from any
revealed scripture, such as the Hindu Puranas and Smwritis, Gura Nanak depended on his own mystical
experience.”’*5 The revelation did not also come to him as an ‘external inspiration’ (called wahi zabir) which
“was used for the production of Quran” during whose process “the mind of Muhammad was passive and the
message, an external one, was brought to him by Gabriel.”’8> On the other hand, “It seems certain,” says
Duncan Greenlees, “that his (Guru Nanak’s) views welled up from the deeps of inspiration in his own heart
and owed little or nothing to what he received from others, either through books or through their words.”’®”
Guru Nanak himself vouchsafed this fact and has himself recorded those experiences and revelations,
received directly from God Himself, in his own bani or revealed word, preserved till today in its original and
undefiled form, singling out his religion, thereby, “from, most other great theological systems as regards the
authenticity of its dogmas.’’’§ He has defined this as Khasam-ki-Bani (“Word of the Lord”) in one hymn, and
Eh Bani Mahan Purakh Ki, (“This Word of the Supreme Being”) in another.*?
The spiritual and religious truths which Guru Nanak preached, had been revealed to him “through a
direct encounter with God at some level of consciousness”, and he preached what he had been told and
taught by God Himself. He conveyed only those words to the world which God had wished him to give
forth as His divine message, as stated by him in verses such as the following :
“As the Lord’s Word descends to me
So I express it, Lalo |”
“T have uttered only what You, O’ Lord!
Have inspired me to utter.’”?!
Guru Nanak has also mentioned in another hymn that he was an ordinary minstrel who was
commissioned and blessed by God with His service. Describing his first audience with the Supreme Being,
the Guru sang aloud thus :
“T was an idle bard,
God assigned to me a rewarding task,
And commanded me to sing His praises night and day.
He summoned me to His Eternal Mansion,
Bestowed on me the robe of holy laudation,
And feasted me on the holy Name ambrosia ......
The Supreme Being is attained, says Nanak,
By laudation of the holy Eternal.”
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
As is well-known to students of comparative religion, contents of revealed religion are conveyed to
the people by the Supreme Being through His special messengers, either by calling them to His presence, as
in the case of Moses, or by communicating His messages to them, as in the case of Prophet Muhammad. As
regards Sikhism, God is stated to have been pleased to use direct ways to convey His Words, Laws and
Commandments, to its founder,” as stated above by the first Sikh Prophet, Guru Nanak, himself in his own
words.
His successors in the Apostolic Lineage have not only endorsed this fact, but have also recorded
their own experiences and audiences, as under, in their respective writings, compiled in 1604 by the Fifth
Master in Guru Granth Sahib, and preserved intact to this day :
I. BY COMMUNICATION :
1. As stated by Guru Amar Das, the Third Master :
“God is Sole and Supreme,
None is His equal.
I speak as and when He makes me speak,
My utterance is directed by Him.”
2. As confirmed by Guru Ram Das, the Fourth Master :
(i) “To Nanak the Truth was revealed by the Lord.
So he relates mysteries of the Divine Portal.’’>
(it) “Know the utterance of the holy Preceptor to be pure and true. Disciples of the Master :
For, the Lord-Creator Himself makes him utter it.’
(iil) “The Lord has appointed me, the unsophisticated, to His task.’
3. As affirmed repeatedly by Guru Arjun Dev, the Fifth Master :
(i) “Inaccessible, unperceivable, my eternal Lord, Nanak speaks as Thou inspire him to speak.’
(ii) “By myself I do not know what to say;
I have stated all by His command.”
(iil) “This servant of the Lord while Conveying the Divine Word,
Speaks as the Lord directs him.’’!0
(iv) “What can I utter ? I know nothing to utter;
As the Lord Wills, so He makes me utter.’”!9!
II. BY AUDIENCE:
1. As stated by Guru Ram Das, the Fourth Master :
“T, a minstrel of the Lord-God,
Came to the Divine Portal,
The Lord inside listened to my supplication,
And called me into His Presence.
Addressing me, He asked,
‘What brings you here, My Minstrel’
I prayed, ‘Confer on me, O, Gracious Lord;
The boon of your ever-abiding Name Divine.’
The Bountiful Lord granted my prayer,
Conferred on me meditation on the Name
And blessed me with a robe of honoutr.””!°
2. As affirmed by Guru Arjun Dev, the Fifth Master :
“As I have attained the sought-after Lord,
Illumination and joy have filled me ......
I have been fully blessed by the Perfect Lord
Who has come, in His grace; to His servant.’’!%
3. “The Lord-God called me into His Mansion
: .. 77104
Wherein I consumed nectar (of Immortality).
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Such important disclosures, solemn statements, persistent affirmations and firm conviction, in the
existence and beneficence of God, prove beyond doubt that Sikhism is a revealed religion. It is so, because it
has been directly revealed by God through a line of Ten Prophet-teachers, who, after receiving its contents
directly from Him, presented it to mankind in word and deed. They reproduced it in exactly the same original
form; and also recorded it in their sacred writings. It is so, because it still remains primary in its source, and
pure in its contents. It is neither selective or elective in its nature; nor secondary in its source; nor adulterated
in its content. Hence, says M. Mujeeb, “the revelation that came to Guru Nanak, must have been as direct
and immediate, and as independent of history and social circumstances, as the religious literature of the Sikhs
show it to be.’”!0
That being so, Sikhism can in no way be called an admixture or juxta position of various doctrines
gathered from this religion or that theological system by its Prophet-teachers who were genuine messengers
of God. Its tenets and teachings have been borrowed neither from Hinduism nor from Islam, nor from any
other such source, as has been alleged by those who have not been able to study or understand its essentials
properly or dispassionately. It is true, in the words of R.C. Majumdar, that “his was the first and also the last
successful attempt to bring together the Hindus and Muslims in a common fold of spiritual and social
brotherhood.”!% The first words he uttered when called to take up the mission of his life after the aforesaid
Audience with God were :
“Nah ko Hindu Nab Mussalman.”
“There is no Hindu, there is no Mussalman.””!97
On the face of it, this cryptic phrase was “a simple announcement, and yet a significant one in the
context of India of his day.!°8 To a society torn by conflict,! he brought a vision of common humanity — a
vision which transcended all barriers of creed and caste, race and country. He reminded men of their
essential oneness. The terms, ‘Hindu’ and ‘Mussalman’, included Jainas, Buddhists, Jews, Christians and so
on. Guru Nanak was asking men of all faiths and denominations to look beyond external divisions and
distinctions to the fundamental unity of mankind. In proclaiming the unity which lay beyond particularisms,
Guru Nanak was not overruling any existing religious designation or tradition. His intention was more radical
: “he wanted to point men beyond their accepted condition to a new possibility — a human community with
a true spirit of fellowship and justice, with that deep ethical and spiritual commitment which expresses itself
in concern for fellowmen. Nor was he seeking a syncretistic union between Hinduism and Islam, or striving
to achieve in his teachings a judicious mixture of elements from both to be acceptable to all. His equal
attention to Hindu and Muslim identities and use of some of their religious vocabulary have led some to
depict him as the reconciler of the two faiths, and to see Sikhism as ‘a deliberate mingling of Hindu and
Muslim practices. To do so will mean missing much of his individual genius and misinterpreting the
historical development issuing from his revelation.”’!!° The beginnings of the Sikh faith, in fact, go back to
this revelation which Guru Nanak brought to light around 1496 A.D., soon after his enlightenment and just
before his departure for his preaching odysseys in India and abroad.
Vil
Sikhism is, above all, a complete religion in all respects like all other original and revealed religions of
the world.
1. It is Ab-al-Magam,'"' having its own spiritual and political Capital, viz., the holy city of Amritsar
(as Mecca is for Islam), with its world famous Harimandar (Golden Temple) and Akal Takht which are its
focal point, and for its followers the highest seat of spiritual and temporal authority, besides being “the centre
of a World religion, meeting ground of the various facets of the human-spirit, and a profound symbol of
future confluence of the World cultures into a universal culture for mankind.””!!?
2. It is Ab-al-Kitab,' possessing its own holy book, viz., Guru Granth Sahib (as Quran is for Islam),
which is not only the Guru Eternal of its adherents, but is also unique among the world’s sacred scriptures. It
has been acclaimed as “the only non-denominational scripture,’”!+ the “scripture of universal religion” and
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
“part of mankind’s common spiritual treasure,’ which, according to Arnold Toynbee, “should be brought
within the direct reach of as many people as possible” and which also “deserves close study from the rest of
the world.”!5
3. Itis Ab-al-Milla''® being a true religion revealed by Guru Nanak and having its own fellowship of
faith and a cohesive community, called sangat and Panth. The Turkish and Persian connotations of the word
will mean a ‘nation’, a ‘people’ and a ‘state.’!!7 Sikhs are a casteless democratic society, assuring equal status
and respect for all. It is for this society that Guru Gobind Singh, while expressing his great love and respect
for it, declared :
“Whatever is available in my house, my wealth,
My body, my mind, even my head
Are ever at the disposal of my people.’”!'8
Paying his tribute to their selfless services, contributions and achievements, he also stated without
any reservation that :
“Tt is through their favour that
I have won my battles,
And have gifts been bestowed.
It is through their favour that
I have overcome my troubles
And my stores are filled.
It is through their favour that
I have acquired knowledge
And have smothered my enemies.
It is also through their favour that
I am exalted and have attained this position;
Otherwise, there are millions of
Humble persons like myself going about.’”!!9
After administering Khande di Pabul” to the First Five, knighting them as Singhs,'*! and proclaiming
them as his panj piare,'?? the inaugurator of that ‘self-abnegating, martial and casteless’ Fellowship of Faith,
Guru Gobind Singh, himself besought to be initiated by them in the same way as he had initiated them.
Having been initiated and admitted as such to their brotherhood, called Khalsa,!> he later announced that he
had created the Khalsa in his own image under the direct command of God, the Timeless Being :
“The Khalsa is my alter ego, my own image,
The Khalsa is my embodiment.
In it I have my being.
The Khalsa is my beloved ideal.”’!74
Hence, there was to be no difference between him, the Guru and the Khalsa, as created and initiated
by him in his own image. All this is unheard of in the annals of the religious and spiritual history of the
world.
4. It is Ab/i-Kalam,'> having firm faith in the doctrine of the Shabad'?° the holy Word, and the
Shabad-Guru, 1.e., the Word is Guru and Guide.!?7
“God permeates the celestial music of the Word.”
“The Word is the essence of all meditation and discipline.’
“God’s Name is cherished in One’s heart by means of the Word.
The supreme state, realization and liberation is attained by means of the Word.””!2°
“The Word alone can ferry us across the Ocean of Existence.’’!30
“The holy Word is the true Preceptor,
The Guide, the Mystery profound and inscrutable.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
And it is the Word, the absence of which
Results in spiritual confusion.”!!
5. It is Ab-al-Zaban, having its own language, viz., Panjabi (as Arabic is for Islam), with its own
specific script called Gurmukhi, in which its scripture, annals and chronicles, etc., stand recorded right from
the beginning.
6. It is Ab-al-Nishan, having its own distinct flag or banner, called Kesri Nishan Sabib, with Khanda
(the Khalsa emblem) inscribed and or installed thereon (as the parcham is for Islam). It keeps on waving over
all Sikh temples, called gurdwaras.
7. It is Ab-al-Shabad,'>? cherishing a long and unique line of great martyrdoms, like those of its two
prophets (viz. the Fifth, Guru Arjun Dev and the Ninth, Guru Tegh Bahadur), the Sahibzadas (Babas Ajit
Singh, Jhujar Singh, Zorawar Singh and Fateh Singh) and their followers (such as Bhai Mati Das and Bhai
Mani Singh).
8. It is Ah-al-Shamshir, possessing the ceremonial sword called kirpan, as a symbol of power,
sovereignty and weapon of defence and justifiable offence in time of need. This specific weapon is a
significant part of the required uniform of a member of the Khalsa Brotherhood, being one of the Five Ks or
symbols of the Sikh faith, obligatory for him to always keep on his body. “Since a member of the Khalsa
Brotherhood is pledged not to accept any alien restrictions on his civic freedom, he is enjoined to insist on
and struggle for his unrestricted right to wear and possess arms of offence and defence.’’!%3 According to a
quotation attributed to Guru Gobind Singh :
“The political power and the State rest on armaments.
And without political sovereignty,
the good way of life cannot securely prevail in society.”!54
As he created the Khalsa “to establish the ever-persisting community of saint-soldiers,’ who could
assist in the fulfilment of Guru Nanak’s revelation and mission, it was considered essential to equip them with
an “instrument of offence and defence and as an emblem of power and dignity which India had lost and
which Guru Gobind Singh wanted to restore.”’!
At the same time, he approved and allowed recourse to the sword as ‘the last resort of a reasonable
man for settling conflicts when all other means have failed in due course. In his letter to Emperor
Aurangzeb, he, therefore, made it quite clear that,
“When an affair is past every other remedy,
It is just and righteous to draw the sword.”!36
It is obvious that the creator of the Khalsa created this new metaphor of the sword “to give a new
otientation to the minds of men given to passivity.”!°”
9. It is Ab-al-Sunnah'38 as well, having its own usages, customs and a distinctive code of conduct
recorded in its scripture, compositions of Bhai Gurdas and Bhai Nand Lal, various Rahitnamas!*° and Rahit-
Maryada.!40
Describing the Sikh way of life, these works cover not only the spiritual discipline and moral code,
but also the social behaviour of the community whose members “are required to observe a distinctive code of
conduct, one which specifies normative behaviour, outward appearance, and social obligation.” !4!
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
VIII
Sikhism is, thus, a complete and perfect religion, not only because of its having such prominent
features, elements and essentials of a ‘higher-religion’, but also because it was established, as its Founder
stated, to carry out a specific command of the Lord-God Who Himself is, as proclaimed by him in the
following couplet, All perfection or perfection-incarnate :
“All that the Perfect One has made is perfect.
There is nothing lacking or excessive in its making.”!4?
It is dynamic, stable and eternal, too, as, according to the holy compiler of its sacred scripture,
“The holy Preceptor has laid the immutable foundation of the faith
That never and in no way shall shake.”!3
Rather, it becomes firmer and firmer with the passage of each day, as stated below:
“The eternal foundation laid by Guru Nanak, Is ever-ascendant.”’!4
According to the following assertion of the contemporary bards, Rai Balwand and Satta,
“Gutu Nanak founded the True Dominion of God.
He raised the citadel of Truth on firm foundations.’’!45
On these foundations was raised a glorious spiritual and temporal edifice by Guru Gobind Singh
who imparted his “stern Olympian air” to the followers of his, who are recognizable till today by their
distinctive appearance and are distinguished by their everpresent high spirits, particularly in a period of
adversity and crisis. That is so because “His impress not only elevated and altered the constitution of their
minds, but contrary to the experience of ethnological experts, it also operated materially and gave amplitude
to their physical frames. They came to be regarded as models of physical beauty and stateliness of manner. A
tremendous change was affected in the whole tone of their national character. Even those people who had
been considered as dregs of humanity were changed, as if by magic, into something rich and strange. The
sweepers, barbers and confectioners, who had never so much as touched the sword, and whose whole
generation had lived as grovelling slaves of the so-called higher classes, became, under the stimulating
leadership of Guru Gobind Singh, doughty warriors who conquered fear, and who were ready to rush into
the jaws of death at the bidding of their Guru.’’!46
IX
This revealed, distinct and complete religion of such self-sacrificing saint-soldiers is a universal world
faith with an all-embracing appeal and elevating message for all mankind. “It is the faith of the New Age,”
says Rev. Bradshaw, “It is the summum bonum'*’ for the modern man. It completely supplants and fulfils all
the former dispensations of older religions. The other religions contain Truth, but Sikhism contains the
fullness of Truth. The older faiths were good in their day, but that day is now past; and we are living in the
dispensation of Guru Nanak. Just as we appreciate the discovery of modern living and do not want to
exchange our modern jet airlines, automobiles and electricity for the horse-drawn carriages and candles of the
past, we do not want to exchange the New Age Faith of Guru Nanak for any of the old age systems and their
antiquated philosophies. The Sikh faith is the universal religion for the present space age. The Sikh religion
is truly the answer to the problems of the modern man.’’48 And it “is the only living faith,” according to
Bittencourt, “that gives the healing outlook on life.”!49
As regards its potential and prospects in the religious domain of the world, it was Macauliffe, who,
while addressing the Quest Society in 1910 at London, stated : “The Sikh religion (as compared to other
religions) presents no mysteries, and embraces an ethical system such as has never been excelled, if indeed it
has ever been equalled. It offers fewer points of attack than any other theological system, and if patronized
and cherished, as its religious and political importance deserves, by a powerful government, it might become
one of the first religions on this planet.’’!5°
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Dorothy Field observed as follows in 1914, “Sikhism is capable of a distinct position as a world
religion, so long as the Sikhs maintain their distinctiveness. The religion is also one which should appeal to
the Occidental mind. It is essentially a practical religion. If judged from the pragmatical standpoint, which is
a favourable point of view in some quatters, it would rank almost first in the world. Of no other religion can
it be said that it had made a nation in so short a time. The religion of the Sikhs is one of the most interesting
at present existing in India, possibly indeed in the whole world. That it should have transformed the outcaste
Indian — a notoriously indolent and unstable person — into a fine and loyal warrior is little short of a
miracle.”'5!_ It was Arnold Toynbee again who prophesied, therefore, as recently as in 1960 : “Mankind’s
religious future may be obscure; yet one thing can be foreseen. The living higher religions are going to
influence each other more than ever before in the days of increasing communication between all parts of the
world and all branches of the human race. In this coming religious debate, the Sikh religion, and its scripture,
the Adi Granth, will have something of special value to say to the rest of the world.””!*2
This will indeed be so, because it will have the opportunity of sharing the sort of experience which
the Nobel-laureate Pearl S. Buck had gained when she observed, after going through the 4-volume English
translation (by Dr Gopal Singh) of Guru Granth Sahib : “I have studied the scriptures of other great religions,
but I do not find elsewhere the same power of appeal to the heart and mind as I find here in these volumes.
They are compact in spite of their length, and are a revelation of the vast reach of the human heart, varying
from the most noble concept of God to the recognition and indeed the insistence upon the practical needs
of the human body. There is something strangely modern about these scriptures and this puzzled me, until I
learned that they are in fact comparatively modern, compiled as late as the 15th century, when explorers were
beginning to discover that the globe, upon which we all live, is a single entity divided only by arbitrary lines of
out own making. Perhaps this sense of unity is the source of power I find in these volumes. They speak to
persons of any religion or of none. They speak for the human heart and the searching mind.”’!53 And they do
speak in verses such as these which, indeed, indicate that unique concept of unity and universality :
“The One Lord is our Father,
We all are His children.” '54
“None is our enemy,
Not is anyone a stranger to us.
We are in accord with all.
The one God is pervasive in all creation
At the sight of which Nanak is in bloom of Joy.”!55
These and many other hymns contained in Guru Granth Sahib, clearly visualize and preach a religion
which knows no ethnical, racial or regional limitations; recognises no distinction on account of birth, sex,
caste, creed or colour, embodies universal respect and concern for all, and regards all as equals. This is
testified by its first and last prophets, Guru Nanak Dev and Guru Gobind Singh, in the following words :
“There is Light among all
And that Light is God’s Own.
Which pervades and illuminates everyone.”’!56
“Some one by shaving his head
Becomes a sanyasi, another a yogi,
And yet another passes for a monk or ascetic.
Some call themselves Hindus,
Other claim to be Muslims;
Among these some are Shzas and some ate Sunnis.
Recognise all as belonging to the one race of humanity
God as Creator (for the Hindus) and God as Good (for the Muslims)
God as Sustainer and God as Merciful
Is all one and the same God.
Recognise not another even in error or in doubt.
Worship that One alone,
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
As He is the Supreme Lord of us all.
It is only His form, His Light
That is diffused in one and all.’’!57
Hence, the followers of this universal faith conclude their daily prayer to that One God, in the name
of their founder, Guru Nanak Dev, with the following couplets :
“ May Your holy Name,
be ever in ascendance.
May peace and prosperity
come to all !!
In Your Will
158
By Your Grace Ties
They, thereby, ask for God’s blessings in favour not only of their own community, but also of the
entire humanity, for the maximum good of each and every creature in the world.
D4
Thus, apart from being such a distinct monotheistic faith, Sikhism is also a social and fraternal
religion, standing equally for the common Fatherhood of God and universal Brotherhood of Man,
guaranteeing equal status to all human beings and asserting that normal family life, lived with virtuous
conduct and firm faith in God, surely leads to the path of salvation.
“Contemplation of the True Lord brings illumination,
Which enables one to remain unattached in the midst of evil.
Such is the greatness of the True Preceptor
(that through His grace and guidance)
One can attain fullness
while living with one’s wife and children.”’!5°
Hence, it is the religion of our time, modern in outlook, scientific in analysis, rational in approach
and practical in adaptability; suited to the needs, aspirations and conditions of the modern man and his social
set-up. It is a religion which is concerned with the creation of a just social order, and is committed to social
equality and peaceful co-existence, as proclaimed by its Fifth prophet, Guru Arjun Dev, in the following
verse:
“The Gracious Lord has now promulgated His ordinance;
None shall dominate over others or cause pain;
All shall abide in peace and happiness.
As the governance shall be gentle and affectionate.”!
Sikhism enjoins on its followers social responsibility involving both social service and social action:
“He who does dedicated service in the world
gets a place at His Portal.”!°!
“They alone understand the right way
Who eat the bread of their labour,
And shate it with others.” !62
The above directives of Guru Nanak, (couched in his own pithy aphorisms : Nam Japo, Kirt Karo,
Vand Chhako) are indeed “the foundation of a spiritually oriented, dynamic social life.’! His frequent
exhortations to follow the under-mentioned six-sided discipline cultivates and follows the virtues associated
with it, and leads further to the enrichment and fulfilment of such an ideal life :
Naam +: Devotion to the Divine Name.
Daan +: Giving to others, particularly to the needy.
Isnan : Purity of mind, body and environment.!
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Seva : Service of mankind.'%
Simran + Contemplation and remembrance of God.!
Satsang : Fellowship or company of true believers : Association with holy men.!9
XI
Sikhism is thus based on humanistic and universal values of the purest form. Human freedom and
dignity, self-realization and self-confidence, service and sacrifice have been the essential elements of its ethos.
The history and heritage of this religion, whether in its principles, doctrines and sacred
pronouncements, or in the practical lives of its founders and followers, “has been one of exhortation to
liberation from all kinds of degrading bondage, mental, spiritual and social. Long before the modern idea of
social freedom was evolved in the West, Sikhism had brought to mankind the message of freedom. In its
social aspects, it was a movement of freedom from feudalism and caste tyranny. While socially, it brought to
man liberation from feudalism and caste tyranny, spiritually it brought to man freedom from suppression and
those false beliefs which enslaved man to a selfish or ignorant priest-craft, whether the priest was called
Brahmin, Yogi or Mullah.” The founder of the holiest Sikh shrine and the compiler of the Sikh Scripture,
Guru Arjun Dev, has himself recorded the impact of this unique movement in the following verse :
“The eggshell of doubt has shattered,
And the mind is illumined;
The Master has freed us from bondage
By cutting off fetters from our feet.’
This is the verse which Macauliffe, while recognizing its lasting significance, reproduced on the title-
page of each of the six volumes of his magnum opus, The Sikh Religion, published in 1909 by the Oxford
University. This is also the verse on the basis of which Banerjee stated, seventy years later : “The fetters of
ritualistic religion were cut off and the captives were ...... freed; and the foundations of the Spiritual Empire
were laid. On these foundations was raised an imposing structure of Temporal Empire, blessed by Guru
Gobind Singh’s never-to-be forgotton utterance : RAJ KAREGA KHALSA.”
NOTES AND REFERENCES
1. Its operative clause, in the original, reads as follows : “Nanak prastan ra har ja kih bayaband ba-qatal
rasanand.” Akhbar-i-Darbar-i-Mualla (cf. A Brief Account of the Sikh People, by Prof. Dr Ganda
Singh, Amritsar, 1956, reprint, Delhi, 1971, p. 29).
2. Gupta, Prof. Dr Hari Ram, History of the Sikhs, Vol. WU, 3rd revised edition, New Delhi-1978,
p. 39. See also Browne, James, Hestory of the Origin and Progress of the Sikhs (India Tracts),
London-1788, Vol. I, p. 13; M’Gregor, W.L., The History of the Sikhs, London-1846, Vol. I, pp.
113-114.
3. Latif, Syed Mohammad, A Hastory of the Punjab from the Remote Antiquity to the Present Times, Calcutta-
1891, p. 213.
4. Miskin, Tahmas Khan, Tazkirah-Tahmas Miskin, also called 'Tahmas Namah, MS. No. 1918 of
British Museum, London, dated 1779-80 A.D., Forster George, A Journey from Bengal to England,
London - 1798, Vol. I, p. 319.
5. That fearful bloody carnage which occurred on 5th February, 1762 at Kup, near Malerkotla, is
known as Dogja Wadda Ghalughara, 1.e., the Second great Holocaust.
6. Nur-ud-Din, Husain Khan, Sayyed, Tarzkh-e-Najib-ud-Daulah, also called Abwal-i-Najib-ud-Daulah,
MS. No. 24410 of B.M., London, f. 57a (cf. English Translation by Sir Jadu Sarkar in the
Islamic Culture, 1933-34); Khushwaqt Rai, Tawarikh-i-Sikhan, also called Kétab-i-Tawarikh-1-
Punjab, MS. No. Or. 187 of B.M., London, dated 1811, f. 95.
7. Trumpp, Dr Ernest; The Adi Granth, London-1877, p. vi.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
8. Bhattacharya, Joginder Nath, Hindu Castes and Sects, Calcutta-1896, p. 511; reprint-1968, p. 404.
9, Macauliffe, M.A., The Sikh Religion under Banda and its Present Condition in the Calcutta Review,
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
Calcutta-1881, Vol. CXLV, p. 168; The Sikb Rehigion and its Advantages to the State, Simla-1906,
p. 28; How the Sikhs became a Militant Race? Simla- 1906, pp. 26-27.
Macauliffe, M.A., The Sikb Religion, Its Gurus, Sacred Writings and Authors, Oxford-1909, Vol. 1, p.
Lvii.
Narang, Dr Sir Gokul Chand, Transformation of Sikhism, Lahore-1912; 2nd. ed. Lahore-1945,
p. 350.
Por details see Muslim League Attack on Sikhs and Hindus in the Punjab by Prof. Gurbachan Singh
Talib, Amritsar-1950; Divide and Quit by Mr. Penderal Moon. London-1961; The Partition of
Punjab by Dr Kirpal Singh, Patiala-1978.
Khushwant Singh, The Sikhs, London-1953, p. 7.
Narang, Transformation of Sikhism, op. cit., p. 350.
Kapur Singh’s speech entitled, Sikhs and Sikhism, Vancouver, 7th October 1974, p. 26.
“Of the total number of persons martyred during the Independence Movement, 75% were Sikhs;
of the number sent to gallows, 81% were Sikhs; and those exiled and deported to Andamans, a
deadly and uninhabitated island in the Bay of Bengal in the Indian Ocean, 80% were the Sikhs.”
(cf. Sikhism by Prof. Dr Ujagar Singh, Washington-1988, p. 22).
Under ‘Operation Blue Star’, stated to be “the biggest and the most significant army action
against its own countrymen ever taken in the world,” and used as the “Code name for the
Indian army’s move into Punjab against the Sikhs” during the first week of June 1984. (Gurmit
Singh, Dr, Hostory of Sikh Struggles, Vol. Ill, p. 1). “On 5th June 1984, the Indian army began
its attack on the complex at Amritsar which housed the two most sacred shrines of the Sikh
Community, the Golden Temple and the Akal Takht ...... tanks were ordered in and the Akal
Takht was virtually reduced to rubble.” (Mark Tully & Satish Jacob, Amritsar : Mrs. Gandbi’s Last
Battk, Delhi-1985, p.i.). For some details see Report to the Nation : Oppression in Punjab by
Citizens for Democracy, Bombay-1985.
History of Sikh Struggles, op. cit., Vol. III, pp. 28-29, 34- 39. For some details refer to the
Reports to the Nation published under the auspices of the People’s Union for Democratic
Rights; People’s Union For Civil Liberties (entitled Who Are The Guilty ?, New Delhi-1984) and
the Citizens For Democracy (entitled Truth About Delhi Violence, Delhi-1985); Army Action in
Punjab : Prelude and Aftermath, New Delhi-1984 : Report of the Citizens’ Commission : Delhi-31st
Oct. to 4th Nov. 1984, New Delhi-1985.
Banerjee, Prof. Dr Anil Chandra, Guru Nanak : The Teacher of Man, Chandigarh-1979, p. 23.
Parrinder, Prof. Geoffrey, World Religions from Ancient History to the Present, New York-1983, _ p.
260.
. The Hindustan Times, New Delhi-2nd June, 1957. See also Kapur Singh, S7&h and Sikhism, op. cit.,
p. 3.
. Carpenter, J. Estlin, Theesm in Medieval India, London-1921, p. 489.
. Heiler, F., The Gospel of Sadbu Sunder Singh, London-1927, pp. 35-36.
Khushwant Singh, The Sikhs Today, New Delhi-1959; reprint, 1969, p. xiii.
. Khushwant Singh, A History of the Sikhs, Princeton-1963, Vol. I, p. 17.
. Bhattacharya, Hindu Castes and Sects, op. cit;, Ist. ed., pp. 497, 510; reprint, pp. 393, 403.
. Time, New York, dated 12th November, 1989, p. 53.
. Picott, Frederic, Sikbism in the Dictionary of Islam by Rev. T.P. Hughes, London-1885, p.
583 & 594.
. Tara Chand, Dr, Influence of Islam on Indian Culture, Allahabad-1946, p. 169.
. Rajagopalachari, Sri, Vaishnava reformers of India.
. Williams, Monier, Brabmanism and Hinduism, London-19, p. 64.
. Battany, G.T., Encyclopaedia of World Religions, London-19 ......, p. 246.
cf. Insha Ulla Khan, Maulvi, Szehon aur Mussalamanon Ke Ruhani Tualgat, Lahore-1909.
.cf. Muhammad Ali, Maulvi, The Founder of Sikhism, Lahore-1919.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
. cf. Nizami, Khawaja Hassan, S7kb Oaum aur unke Bani ki nisbat Mussalamanon ki Muhabbat-amez
Rai, Batala-1919.
. cf. Muhammad Yusuf, Sheikh, Baba Nanak Ka Mazbab, Qadian-1919.
. Quadiani, Mirza Ghulam Ahmed, Satya Bachan, Batala 2nd. ed. 1902, pp. 4377-4504.
. Trumpp, E., The Adi Granth, op. cit. ch. UI, p. ci.
. Narang, Transformation of Sikhism, op. cit., p. 379.
. Gandhi, M.K., Young India, May-1924, p. 829. Ahmadabad.
. Archer, Prof. Dr J.C., The Sikhs, in Relation to Hindus, Moslems, Christians and Ahmadiyas : a Study in
Comparative Rehigion, Princeton-1946, p. 301.
. Ibid., p. 302; Akbar, Dr Mohammad, The Punjab Under the Mughals, Lahore-1943; reprint, Delhi-
1979, p. 187.
. Kenneth, W.J., Journal of Asian Studies, transl. in Singh Sabha Patrika, Amritsar-January, 1974, pp.
92-94.
. Chaudhuri, Nirad C., The Autobiography of an Unknown Indian, London-1951, pp. 492-3.
. Smith, Marian W., Syathesis and other Processes in Sikhism 1a the American Anthropologist, Vol. 50,
No. 3, Pt. I, July-September, 1948, pp. 457-62; Marenco, Ethne K, The Transformation of Sikh
Society, New Delhi-1976, p. 24.
. Greenlees, Duncan, The Gospel of the Guru Granth Sahib, Madras-1952, p. 2106.
. Bittencourt, Dr Edward A.de., in his ‘Foreword’ to the Sikb Way of Life by Ranbir Singh, New
Delhi-1968, p. vi
. Macauliffe, M.A., The Sikh Religion, op. cit., Vol. I, p. Liv.
. Ibid., Vol. I., Introduction, p.lLv. Lv.
. Majumdar, Dr R.C., The History and Culture of the Indian People, Vol. V1, Bombay-1960; 2nd.-1967,
p. 569.
. Griffin, Sir Lepel, Rajas of the Punjab, Lahore-1879, p. 338.
. Banerjee, Prof. Indubhushan, Evolution of the Khalsa, Calcutta-1936, Vol. I, p. 182.
. Aqyun Dev, Guru, Guru Granth Sahib, Amritsar-1604 A.D., Rag Bhairo, M.5, p. 1136.
Mohsin Fani, Shaikh, (Ardistani, Mobid Zalfiqar), Dabistan-i-Mazahib, dated 1654 A.D. - 1904,
p. 223.
. Ibid., p. 233.
. Ibid., p. 223. See also Ganda Singh, Prof. Dr, Nanak Pantbis, extracted, translated and edited
with notes, Amritsar-1940, pp. 4, 5, 10, 11.; Nanak Panthis or The Sikhs and Sikhism of the 17th
Century, in the Journal of Indian History, Vol. XIX, pt. 2.
. Gurdas, Bhai, Varan, composed around 1600 A.D., Var no. 3, paurino. 5.
. Cole, W. Owen, Stkhism and Its Indian Context (1469-1708), New Delhi-1984, p. 251.
. “For the history of the Sikhs in particular, and a knowledge of the country and people in 1764”,
according to Sir Jadu Nath Sarkar in his ‘Foreword’ to the Jang Namah, (fn. no. 58).
. Nur Muhammad, Qazi, Jang Namah, Gunjaba-1765, ch. XLI, pp. 156-159 edited and translated
into English by Dr Ganda Singh, Amritsar-1939, pp. 158-59 (of the text), pp. 59-59 (of the
English rendering).
Cunningham, Capt. J.D., A Hastory of the Sikhs from the Origin of the Nation to the Battles of Suttle),
London-1849; reprint, Delhi-1985, pp. 75-76. See also Elphinstone, M., History of India; Rise of
the British Power in the East, Vol. II, London-1887, pp. 561-564.
Elliot, Sit Charles, Hinduism and Buddhism, London-1921, Vol. II, p. 267; reprint-1954, p. 272.
See also Malcolm, Lt. Col., Sketch of the Sikhs : A Singular Nation who inhabits the Provinces of the
Punjab, London-1812, pp. 129, p. 148; Burnes, Alexander, Travels into Bukhara, London-1834,
Vol. p. 285, Vol. I, p. 39; Barth, A., Redgions of India, Paris-1882; London-1906, pp. 242 &
249,
Aurobindo, Sri, The Foundation of Indian Culture, Pondicherry, 1959, pp. 150-151.
Aurobindo, Sri, A Defence of Indian Culture, Religion and Spirituality, published in The Arya, Vol. VI,
No. 1-1920.
66. Jain, Nirmal Kumar, S7kb Religion and Philosophy, New Delhi- 1979, p. 1.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
67. Ishwari Prasad, Dr, The Mughal Empire, Alahabad-1974, p. 30.
68. Field, Dorothy, The Refigion of the Sikhs, London-1914, p. pp. 34, 10.
69. Parrinder, Edward Geoffrey, World Religions, from Ancient History to the Present, 1983, p. 251.
70. See Bachitar Natak by Guru Gobind Singh, Anandpur Sahib-1696, cont. VI; Chaubis Avtar, Verses
2-27, 2488; etc.. (Ramkali Var Patshahi Daswen ki, dated 1700 A.D. (), Stanza No. 16). See also
Panth Parkash by Giani Gian Singh, Delhi-1880, ch. 85.
71. Kapur Singh, Parasarprasna or The Baisakhi of Guru Gobind Singh (An Exposition of Sikhism),
Jalandhar-1959, pp. 8-9; 2nd. ed., Parasarprasna, Amritsat-1989, p. 4.
72. Macauliffe, M.A., The Sikh Religion, op. cit., Vol. V, p. 93.
73. Bute Shah alias Ghulam Muhay-ud-Din, Tawarikh-i-Punjab, MS. Ludhiana-1848, pp. 405-406;
Macauliffe, M.A., The Szkb Religion, op. cit., Vol. V, pp. 93-94; Teja Singh, Prin. & Ganda Singh,
Prof., A Short History of the Sikhs, Bombay-1950, pp. 68-69; Kapur Singh, Parasarprasna, op. cit.,
pp. 2-3.
74. Macauliffe, M.A., The Sikb Religion, op. cit., Vol. V, p. 94.
75. Batalia, Ahmad Shah, Tawarikh-i-Hind, MS. dated 1818; Bute Shah, Tawarikh-i-Punjab, op.
cit., 406.
76. Khushwant Singh, A History of the Sikhs, Princeton-1963; 7th impr.-1987, Vol. I, pp. 83-84.
77. See Saina Pati, S71 Guru Sobha, Anandpur Sahib-1711, Chs. V & VU; Santokh Singh, Bhai, Sv
Gurpratap Suraj Granth, Kaithal-1843, III. 21.
78. Gobind Singh, Guru, 33 Swaiyyei, Sw. no. 1. in the Dasam Granth, op. cit.
79. Harbans Singh, Prof., The Heritage of the Sikhs, New Delhi-1983; 2nd. ed., 1985, p. 95.
80. Barsakhi of Guru Gobind Singh, op. cit., p. 9.
81. Archer, The Sikhs in Relation to Hindus, Muslims, Christians and Abmadiyas, op. cit., pp. 1, v, viit.
82. Ralph Singh, S7kbism, New York-1988 (c.), p. 1.
83. Gurdev Singh, Justice, Perspectives on the Sikh Tradition, Patiala-1986, pp. 5, 8-9, See McLeod,
W.H., Guru Nanak and the Sikh Religion, Oxford 1968; The Evolution of the Sikh Community, Delhi-
1975; Early Sikh Tradition, Oxford 1980, 22-23.
84. McLeod, W.H., The Evolution of the Sikh Community, op. cit., pp. 16-18; Gurdev Singh, Perspectives on
the Sikh Tradition, op. cit. pp. 22-23.
85. Banerjee, Guru Nanak, The Teacher of Man, op. cit. p. 44.
86. Hastings, James, Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics, New York-1914; latest ed. 1971, Vol. VII, p.
354.
87. Greenlees, The Gospel of Guru Granth Sahib, op. cit., p. 37.
88. Macauliffe, M.A., The Sikh Refigion, op. cit. Vol. I, p. iti.
89. Guru Granth Sahib, op. cit., Rag Ti/ang, M.I., p. 722 and Rag Ramkali, M.I, p. 935.
90. Guru Granth Sahib, op. cit., Rag Tilang, M.L., p. 722.
91. Ibid., Rag Wadhans, M.L., p. 566.
92. Ibid., Rag Majh; ML, p. 150. See also p. 148.
93. This has been duly mentioned by the earliest chroniclers of Sikh religion; such as by Bhai Gurdas
(1551-1629) in his var no. 1 pauri no. 24; Puratan Janamsakhi (1634 c.), pp. 17-18; Sodhi
Meharban (1581-1640) in his Sachkhand Pothi (dt. 1620 c.), pp. 88-89; Bhai Nand Lal (1633-
1741) in his Ganj Namah, ch. 1, verses 48-50.
94. Ibid., Raga Sri, M.3, p. 39.
95. Ibid., Raga Gauri, M. 4, p. 308.
96. Ibid., Raga Gauri, M. 4, p. 308.
97. Ibid., Raga Asa, M. 4, p. 449.
98. Ibid., Raga Suhi, M. 5, p. 743.
99. Ibid., Raga Suhi, M. 5, p. 763.
100. Ibid., Raga Sorath, M. 5, p. 629.
101. Ibid., Raga Sarang, M. 5, p. 1203.
102. Ibid., Raga Sri, M. 4, p. 91.
103. Ibid., Raga Sarang, M. 5, p. 1237.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
104. Ibid., Raga Wadbans, M. 5, p. 562.
105. Mujeeb, Prof. M., Guru Nanak’s Religion, Islam and Sufism, in Guru Nanak : His Life, Times and
Teachings, ed. by Prin. Gurmukh Nihal Singh, New Delhi-1969, ch. VI, p. 116.
106. Surendra Nath Banerjee, as quoted in The History and Culture of the Indian People, Vol. UX (ii),
Bombay-1977, p. 481, and Majumdar, Prof. R.C., Ibid., Vol. VI, Bombay-1960; 2nd. ed. 1967,
p. 569.
107. For a detailed account see Guru Nanak : The World-Teacher (Jagat Gurubaba), Chandigarh-1979,
pp. 30-32; and Teachings of Guru Nanak, Chandigarh-1984, pp. 31-32 — both by Dr Harnam
Singh Shan.
108. According to Dr Mohan Singh, “No teacher of the populace had uttered words of that import
and significance, since the time of Upanishads. Those few words at one stroke felled the giant
structures of caste, credal, sectional and religious differences.” (cf. S77 Guru Nanak Dev and
Nation Building, Tarn Taran-1934, p. 8.
109. Harbans Singh, Prof., Berkeley, Lectures on Sikhism, New Delhi-1983, pp. 9-10 : That terrible
conflict grew from the fact that the “impact of Islam on north-western India in the 11th century
had been through military conquest and sword, and this had created reactions in the proud and
sensitive Hindu mind such as resulted in impassable barriers of hatred and prejudice between
the two World-culture currents, and their mutual contacts have, therefore, left irritating and
unfortunate monuments of bigotry and misunderstanding, spiritual and historical, that still mark
the Indian scene. The Sikh Prophets, the Nanaks, desired to level down these barriers with a
view to discover and provide a common spiritual ground for the two, Hinduism and Islam,
where Hinduism gets over its injured superiority and sense of exclusiveness, and Islam, its
arrogance and self centricity born out of military superiority. The Nanak V declared : Let
Muslims rediscover the truth that the true essence of religious practice is compassion and its
goal, the purification of soul, and that political utilitarianism and expedience is not basic to
Islam as such, and let the Hindus concede that Islam, thus understood, is as respectable and
ceremoniously pure as the flowers, the silk, the deerskin and the butter-fat.” (Guru Granth
Sahib, op. cit. Rag Maru, M. 5, p. 1084; The Golden Temple : Amritsar, a paper tead by S. Kapur
Singh at Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, on 24 Oct. 1977, p. 2).
110. Harbans Singh, Prof., Berkeley, Lectures on Sikhism, New Delhi-1983, pp. 9-10.
111. Ad/ in Arabic originally meaning those who occupy the same tent, thus family inmates.
Therefore, ah/-a/-bait means the household of the Prophet Muhammad, his descendents. But this
word is often connected with other notions, meaning so much as sharing in a thing, belonging
to it or owner of the same, etc. (see The Encyclopaedia of Islam ed. by M.Th. Houtsma & others,
Leyden-1913, Vol. I, p. 183. Magam means place or glorious station. (see Quran, ch. 17, V. 81).
112. The Golden Temple : Amritsar, op. cit., p. 3.
113. “Ab-al-kitab, the people of the Book. Muhammad calls so the Jews and Christians, in distinction
from the heathens, on account of their possessing divine books of revelation, (Tawrat = Torah;
Zabur = Psalter; Indjil = Gospel).” See Ibid., p. 184, “According to T.P. Hughes, it is a term
used in the Quran for Jews and Christians, as believers in a revealed religion.” (See his Dictionary
of Islam, London-1885, p. 12).
114. Khushwant Singh, The Sikbs, Varanasi-1984, p. 21.
115. Toynbee, UNESCO's Selections from the Sacred Writings of the Sikhs, op. cit., p. 9.
116. Mia in Arabic means religion, rite, “In, Kur’an the Prophet speaks of Abraham’s Milla, by
which he means the original revelation in its purity ...... with the article, a/milla means the true
religion revealed by Muhammad and is occasionally used eliptically for ab/-al-milla, the followers
of the Muhammadan teligion.” (See Shorter Encyclopaedia of Islam, ed. by H.A.R. Gibb & J.A.
Kramers, Leiden-1953, p. 380). According to the Ketab ¢-Tarifat, “it is expressive of religion as it
stands in relation to the Prophet, as distinguished from Dzn, which signifies religion as its stands
in relation to God., from Mazbab which signifies religion with reference to learned doctors.”
(See Dictionary of Islam, op. cit., pp. 348-349).
117. See Glasse, Cyril, The Concise Encyclopaedia of Islam, Francisco-1989, p.269.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
118.
119.
120.
121.
122.
123.
124,
125.
126.
127.
128.
129.
130.
To
132:
133.
134.
135.
136.
137.
138.
Khalsa Mahima, Swaiyya no. 3, p. 717.
Ibid., Swaiyya No.2, p. 716.
That is, Baptism of the Double-edged Sword.
That is, the lions, used as surname by all male followers of Sikhism.
That is, the Five Beloved Ones, Three out of them belonged earlier to the so-called low castes
(viz. Muhkam Chand, washerman from Dwarka; Himmat; a cook from Jagannath; Sahib Chand,
a barber from Bidar, the fourth (viz. Daya Ram, a Kshatrtya or Khatri by caste, from Lahore),
the fifth (viz. Dharam Das, a Jat from Delhi).
‘Khalsa’ means the pure baptised and initiated Sikhs; Sikh brotherhood. The aim of Guru
Gobind Singh in founding the Khalsa was to build up a nation of the purified Ones who would
be free from the evils of religion and society. (Teja Singh & Ganda Singh, A History of the Sikhs,
op. cit., p. 72).
See Sarab Loh Granth, ch. Khalsa Parkash.
Kalam in Arabic means word; speech. “The first technical use of Kalam seems to have been in
the phrase Kalam Allah meaning either the Kuran or Allah’s quality (S7fa) called speech.” (See
Short Encyclopaedia of Islam, op. cit., p. 210, Dictionary of Islam, op. cit., p. 260).
“The majesty of the mystic Sabda (Shabad) which we come across in the Sikh scripture,” tells Dr
R.K. Arora, hardly finds any parallel in its fullness ...... It has been associated with God without
attributes ...... As the Guru is the repository of all spiritual jewels, so, in him enshrines the Sabda
and he also imparts it to the devotee. Sabda is the means by which one gets wisdom and the
knowledge of the Lord. ‘By the Sabda of the Guru one recognises the abode of the Lord within.’
(Guru Granth Sahib, p. 364) ...... He is one with Nama and Sabda, the two most profound
concepts in the Sikh faith.” (See The Sacred Scripture : Symbol of Spiritual Synthesis, New Delhi-1988,
pp. 35, 45, 103, 109).
Guru Granth Sahib, op. cit., Raga Asa, M.1, .p. 351.
Ibid., Raga Dhanasari, M.1, p. 661.
Ibid., Raga Parbhati, M.1, p. 1342.
Ibid., Raga Ramkah, M.1, p. 943.
Ibid., Raga Sorath, M.1, p. 635.
Shubada in Arabic means testimony, evidence and martyrdom. The meaning martyr is not found
for Shabid in the Koran. It is only later commentators that have tried to find it in the Sura w. The
development of the meaning of S/abid to martyr took place under Christian influence ...... The
martyr who seals his belief with his death, fighting against the infidels. Shahid through out the
Hadith literature and the great privileges that await him in heaven is readily depicted in
numerous Hadiths ...... In the book of Dyihad, martyrdom is praised quite in the style of the
Hadith ...... The praise of Shahada (martyrdom) led to a real longing to meet a martyr’s death and
even Muhammad and ‘Omar longed for it.’ (see The Dictionary of Islam, op. cit., p. 571; Shorter
Encyclopaedia of Islam, op. cit. p. 515; Encyclopaedia of Islam, op. cit., Vol. IV, p. 259-60. Penrice,
John, A Dictionary and Glossary of the Quran, New Delhi-1978, pp. 79-80).
Kapur Singh, Parasaraprasna, op. cit., p. 108.
As stated by Bhai Santokh Singh, in his Gurpratap Suraj Granth, aithal-1844 ain 7, ansu 36;
Parasarasprasna, op. cit., p. 41.
Teja Singh, Prin., Szehism : Its Ideals and Institutions, 322, Amritsar-1938, reprint-1978, p. 34,
Essays in Sikhism, Lahore-1941; reprint-1988, p. 168.
Guru Gobind Singh, Zafarnamah, Dina Kangar-1706, Verse No. 22.
Heritage of the Sikhs, op. cit., p. 90.
Sunna ot Sunnah means “custom, use and wont, statute.” (see Another Encyclopaedia of Islam. op.
cit., p. 552)” According to H.P.T. Hughes, “lit. a path or way; a manner of life. A term used in
the religion of the Muslims to express the custom or manner of life. Hence, the tradition which
records either the sayings or doings of Muhammad. Consequently, all traditional law is divided
into (1) what Mohammad did; (2) or what Muhammad enjoined; (3) or that which was done or
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
139.
140.
141.
142.
143.
144,
145.
146.
147.
148.
149.
150.
151.
152.
153.
154,
155.
156.
157.
158.
159.
160.
161.
162.
163.
164.
165.
166.
167.
168.
said in the presence of Muhammad and which was not forbidden by him.” (see his Dictionary of
Islam, op. cit., p. 622).
By Rahit we mean the distinctive Sikh code of conduct or discipline which is “feature of
fundamental importance to the life of the Panth,”’ that is, the Sikh religion. The manuals in
which this code is recorded are called Rahitnamas.
That is, the S7&h Code of Conduct compiled by a committee appointed in 1931 by the Shiromani
Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee, Amritsar, with Prin. Teja Singh as convenor. It was
approved by it in 1945 and has since been accepted as an authoritative manual, and regarded as
the standard guide for the whole community.
McLeod, Dr W. H., Textual Sources for the Study of Sikhism, Manchestet-1984, pp. 3, 73.
Guru Granth Sahib, op. cit., Sok Varan te Vadhik, M.I, No. 33, p. 1412.
Ibid., Raga Sarang, M.V., p. 1226.
Ibid., Raga Gujari, M.V., pp. 500-501.
Ibid., Ramkah ki Var, Rai Balwand tatha Sattei Dum akhi st. 1, p. 966.
A\ Short History of the Sikhs, op. cit., pp. 71-72.
That is, the chiefgood, especially as the end on the ultimate determining principle in an ethical
system.
Bradshaw, H.L., SzRbism, in the Sikh Review, Calcutta.
Bittencourt, The Sikh Way of Life, op. cit., p. vi.
Macauliffe, M.A., The Sikh Religion : A Lecture, London-1910, p. 25.
Field, The Religion of the Sikhs, op. cit., p. 9, 34-55.
Toynbee, A., UNESCO's Selections from the Sacred Writings of the Sikhs, Foreword’, pp. 10. 11.
Buck, Mrs. Pearl S., in her Opinion as published in Vol. I of Sri Guru Granth Sahib, English
Version by Dr Gopal Singh, Delhi-1960, p. xiv.
Guru Granth Sahib, op. cit., Raga Sorath, M.V., p. 611.
Ibid., Raga Kanara, M.V., p. 1299.
Ibid., Raga Dhanasari, M.1., p. 663.
Guru Gobind Singh, Aka/ Ustat in Sri Dasam Granth, op. cit., Kabit no. 15/85.
See Ardas, that is the Sikh congregational prayer to God which is a basic religious activity in Sikh
religion. Its version is available in various Gu¢kas (1.e., anthologies of hymns meant for daily and
occasional prayers etc.) and S7kb Rahit Maryada, q.v.
Guru Granth Sahib, op. cit., Raga Dhanasari, M.I., p. 661.
Ibid., Rag Sri, M.V., p. 74.
Ibid., M.I. Rag S77, p. 26.
Ibid., Rag Sarang, M.I., p. 1245.
Mujeeb, Prof. M., in his ‘Foreword’ to Guru Nanak in His own Words by Dr Harnam Singh Shan,
Amritsat-1969, p. xiii.
Guru Granth Sahib, op. cit., Rag Maru, M. 5, p. 1002.
Ibid., Rag Asa, M.L., p. 419.
Ibid., Rag Asa, M.L., pp. 354, 468.
Ibid., Rag Asa, M.I. p. 9, Rag Ramkali, p. 944.
Ibid., p. 72; Rag Sorath, p. 598.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
12
SIKH IDENTITY AND CONTINUITY —
A PERSPECTIVE FROM ETHICS
AVTAR SINGH
One of the most difficult areas of human knowledge relates to the comparative studies. There is a
significant increase in the quantum of tension when this happens to be the area of contemporary religions
and history of the societies where such religions have emerged. The questions about Sikhism are, in a way,
not very different in this respect from the identical questions about the historical identities of Christianity,
Islam, or the faiths of the Aryans before and after their entry into the land, now known as India. Buddhism
and Jainism have experienced no less confusions about their identities at the hands of the lay and somewhat
over-zealous interpreters. We are, therefore, approaching the subject matter of our present paper without any
illusion of its final acceptance. The debate shall, perhaps, continue.
We may notice an important aspect of the comparative study before we proceed any further in this
direction. There are two broad aspects of the work to be done in this area. We may name them as the micro
approach or the macro approach to the subject matter. In terms of ease, the macro approach is to be
preferred and is, in fact, preferred by many people. The macro approach is generally visible in the work of
some of the scholars who are either themselves ‘outsiders’ or approach the subject of their study as outsiders.
The conclusions arrived at are often so general that they appear to be fair and easy to grasp and accept. A
significant thrust of this methodological approach lies in viewing or portraying the subject matter of their
study as syncretic in character. They fuse the earlier-side-end in the history of the tradition, but under
pressure to explain the distinctness, they plant the departures in the mid-point or the end-side point in the
history of the tradition.
The micro approach has to be adopted with great patience and care. It requires hard work and a
good amount of objectivity and regulation of emotion. The scholar has to overcome the temptation to
magnify the trivial and the insignificant. Although the insider is generally gifted with greater possibilities of
understanding his tradition, yet the amount and intensity of differences among the insiders should warn us
that everything need not be final even in the work of insiders. The micro approach can of course be adopted
by the ‘outsiders’ with satisfactory results, if they were not to lose sight of inner experience and the tradition
based on it. The ‘availability’ of the material ‘proof or its ‘non-availability’ is not made the sole ground of
belief in the growth of the illumination in a certain direction.
Apart from the above two paths, there can also be a fairly good combination of the two approaches.
The results differ from each other in the gestalts resulting from these compounds and mixtures. Most of the
synthesis stories display this approach.
We have set out this brief analysis of the three approaches to the comparative study of the religions
in general and of Sikhism in particular. The purpose of this early submission is two-fold. First, we have
sought to hint at the tensions involved in the comparative study and the possible way out adopted by
scholars. Second, it is sought to highlight the fact that two approaches may lead to different results because
of the difference in the approach itself.
Herein, we shall seek to adopt a path somewhat akin to the micro-analysis approach. This will,
hopefully, enable us to keep in view the dynamics of the inner impulse and thus maintain the authenticity of
the work. The paper is rather brief and seeks to analyse and interpret the main theme of the argument. We
may begin first with the main frame of the Sikh theology.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Sikh theology is another area of Sikh religion, which has received continuous attention and has been
a subject for interpretation or re-interpretation. This statement may appear to be contrary to the superficial
notion that Sikh theology has not received attention over the past five centuries or so. It is not unusual to
come across even a few laments who feel sad that the twentieth century displays a singular lack of awareness
of the need for expounding the Sikh theology. A still more interesting observation was presented during a
conference held abroad. The learned scholar appeared to be obsessed by the idea that now there were not
many interpreters of Sikhism. The only persons acknowledged by this scholar as authentic seekers of
knowledge in this area were those who were trained well away from the country of origin of Sikhism, and
who tended to follow a certain methodological approach to the interpretation of Sikh history, or the extended
application of the Western models of anthropological interpretation to the Sikh religion. The conceptual
model of the tribal rituals and rites-de-passage were made applicable to the Sikh society without recognising
the inappropriate consequences which follow from this stretched and stressed approach. This historical, as
well as anthropological, approach does not appear to even notice the evolutionary process in the value
experience or the praxis of the people they seek to study and analyse. Many of the Hindu practices which
were continued by some convert families for some time even after initiation into Sikhism have been taken by
these anthropologists and historians as ‘Sikh rites’, thus displaying a singular lack of the understanding of the
Sikh society, its values, religion and theology.
There are two noticeable characteristics of the normative imperatives and ideals. The normative
cannot be established in terms of the actual conduct or the practical. The anthropoligist, the historian, or
scholars of the like studies are pretty close to their discipline as long as they follow this rule of the game.
They may, however, go astray from their course when they infer the normative from the actual. The
normative is the critique in terms of which the actual is analysed and evaluated. It does not permit us to
establish the normative from what we may tend to believe as being percetved by us. Such a difficulty may
become multiplied manyfold when the normative to be so construed is several centuries away from the times
of the inference by the anthropologist, sociologist, historian or persons of the like disciplines. One may, to
some extent, attempt a history of the morals in this case but the compiler must, in this, clearly distinguish
between the moral values and the history of the events including the personal or social conduct. Such a
distinction is very crucial for both the scholar of the normative or the social sciences. In recent years some
historians or anthropologists appear to have overlooked this, and thus either involuntarily or perhaps by
choice, have created an illusion whereby the actual conduct of some individuals or groups on their way of
change or conversion have been presented as the normative. Often such inferences are made in the face of
the injunctions to the contrary. For example, we are aware of the injunctions by the Gurus in Guru Granth
Sahib against various practices based on superstitions. We are also aware of the often cited incident where
the Gurus have tested the awareness of their followers against superstitions. But all this has not deterred
some scholars from creating the illusion that the Sikh society has consisted of or consists of worshippers of
goddesses and graves. Unfortunately, some scholars appear to be greatly impressed by the empirical
dimensions of the generalisations made by them. The human finitude has often impelled people to seek
strength or success through superstitous actions. But this does not reflect the values and normative teachings
of the traditions to which they belong. There need be no theoretical confusion on this score.
We have a modest programme in this brief paper. Its objective is to direct the attention of keen
students of the Sikh religion, theology and ethics to take notice of the various and sustained efforts to
interpret Sikh theology. Let us begin by stating the nature and scope of Sikh theology before discussing its
main contents.
The word theology is often used to refer to various kinds and aspects of knowledge relating to God.
It may refer to “knowledge of God and the supernatural; religious knowledge and belief, especially when
methodically formulated.” It is also used for “the critical, historical, and psychological study of religion and
religious ideas”, or it may signify “a system of religious theory or observance.” While this may be the general
outline of the subject referred to as theology, there is a wide variation in the actual contents of the various
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
doctrines described as theology of different religions or of the sects within a religion. It is rather difficult to
pronounce which statement of each religion or each sect within a religion is theology proper. However, we
may seek to limit our inquiry to the exposition of Sikh theology, and within Sikhism, the attempt will be to
deal with the mainstream statements.
Historically, the tradition of interpreting the revelation or the Word of God in Sikhism is as old as
the tradition itself. The companions of Guru Nanak and the subsequent Gurus may have been called upon
by themselves, or by those around them, to interpret and explain as one whole the elements of the revelation
and their intra coherence. The existence of the different levels of the seekers of knowledge must also have
made this process of interpretation a continuous one. The added need for this continuous interpretation
could have been the departure of the new doctrines from the traditionally accepted social codes of morals and
ethics. As theology also illumines the personal and social conduct of the related individual, the new frontiers
of the theology also invariably influence his ethical perceptions and actions. Thus, although there may be
ethical conduct which may not be consciously grounded in theology, yet the converse does not appear to be
true. And, where the new religious revelation has directly aimed at social and moral ends, the need for a
continuous interpretation is obvious.
Sikhism is directly grounded in the revelation received by Guru Nanak. His subsequent journeys in
India are said to have been made in the company of Bala or Mardana. Even apart from these companions,
Guru Nanak is recorded to have met many saints and religious leaders during this phase of his life. In a
dialogue recorded as the S%dhba Gosht in Guru Granth Sahib, he is asked by the S7dhas to expound his doctrine.
The dialogue is rich in the theological exposition of Guru Nanak. We encounter the simple and the complex
as the two ends of the dialogue in the S%dba Gosht. The seemingly simple question asked by the Sidhas about
the doctrinal identity of Guru Nanak is answered by the latter in a step-by-step ascending manner of the
exposition of God’s nature and the knowledge of His nature. Towards the higher and the complex end of
the dialogue, the esoteric seems to speak to the esoteric. It is a very fine and illuminating example of the
exposition of the Sikh theology which conveys the profundity of the revelation through the symbols of
everyday use.
The second Guru, Angad, the third Guru, Amardas, and the fourth Guru, Ram Das had respectively
spent time with their earlier preceptors and companions. The exposition of the religious knowledge and
belief by the former for the latter is easy to imagine and understand. A typical Eastern style of describing this
process is like ‘the lamp lighting the lamp.’ There is no break or darkness in between the lighting of the two
lamps in succession.
The role of the fifth Guru, Arjun Dev, is worthy of special mention in any understanding of the
history of Sikh theology. Apart from being himself a Guru, he brought to fruition a tradition of compiling
Guru Granth Sahib. It is often said that Guru Granth Sahib is the only Scripture of a major world religion
which was composed and established during the life-time of the founders themselves. This has obviated the
possibility of any subsequent interpolation. Guru Arjun Dev got the whole Guru Granth Sahib finally
compiled and his trusted scholarly companion, Bhai Grudas, was the principal scribe for the first edition of
Guru Granth Sahib. The present form is of this origin and authenticity.
Bhai Gurdas has also authored some compositions of his own. His writings have often been termed
as the ‘key’ to Guru Granth Sahib. His long association with the fifth Guru has led people to believe that he
is the first theologian of Sikhism, other than the Gurus. His personal status is that of a highly authentic
expositor of the Sikh theology. His ars are a close reflection of the present authentic scripture.
A similar claim is often made in respect of the second scribe of Guru Granth Sahib, namely Bhai
Mani Singh. His compositions are also attempts at the reflection and exposition of the Sikh theology as in
Guru Granth Sahib. He is said to have worked directly under the guidance of the tenth Guru, Gobind Singh.
He is the last important link in the chain of the major Sikh theologians who were contemporary to the Gurus.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
The Sikh theologians who have followed after the cessation of the chain of ten Gurus in Sikhism in
1708 A.D., have proceeded in various directions in their exposition of the Sikh theology. Let us briefly notice
two main streams, both of whom have sought to remain close to the Sikh traditions.
The Nirmalas had emerged as the important theologians of the Sikh religion during the recent past.
They have expounded the Sikh religious knowledge and belief both substantively as well as analogically. The
latter has been done by using the notions of the earlier schools of Indian philosophy and religion. It appears
to have been significant for them to explain the originality of the revelation recetved by the Sikh Gurus by
calling Guru Granth Sahib the fifth Veda, as the status of divine revelation (Sru#) was being conceded by the
people at large in respect of the Vedas. The Nirmalas did not call Guru Granth Sahib as the fifth Veda as a
scripture continuous to the earlier four Vedas. The use of the figure ‘fifth’ is more with a view to stressing the
analogy so as to drive home the view that Guru Granth Sahib is an independent and original revelation. The
use of this analogy has, however, been sometimes misinterpreted.
The Giani tradition of the Sikh theologians has proceeded towards its goal in a somewhat traditional
manner wherein its closeness to the Sikh mainstream has remained strong for a longer time. Some of them
have claimed to continue the Bhai Mani Singh tradition. There are, however, other developments also in this
area. Bhai Vir Singh is a very outstanding theologian whose mainstream acceptability is of an outstanding
status. His contribution to the Sikh intellectual literature and exposition of the theology proper is of a very
significant nature. The mystic quality of his poetry, as well as his famous epic Rana Surat Singh, (1905 A.D.),
which has been described as “the sole epic in Punjabi with a religio-ethical theme” is very impressive. By this
time Bhai Vir Singh was “already famous as an exponent of the teachings of Sikhism through his exegetical
writing no less than his historical novel Swndari.” The Sikh penchant for intermingling the theological with
the social, as observed by us earlier, is continued in Rana Surat Singh also. It has been pointed out that “Rana
Surat Singh, a deeply religious work in spirit, enshrines also a powerful social message.” In it, the Rani is
“exhorted to shed her own despondency and to find a new path of ascent to a fulfilment that is both spiritual
and ethical.” Anyone interested in knowing the Sikh attitude towards theology has to keep in view the Sikh
perception of the concern of God with the social and the ethical. The theological cognition is not without
the ethical impulse and ideal. The ethical is the meeting point of God-His Knowledge-Man axis. This
fundamental nature of the Sikh theology is seen in Guru Nanak’s Svdba Gosht as well as the lay, but devout,
expression in Rana Surat Singh of Bhai Vir Singh. The often quoted saying of Guru Nanak that “Truth is
higher than everything but higher still is true conduct” is an expression of the dynamic nature of the theos
which is the subject-matter of theology. It is partly because of this new, but unmistakable, dimension of Sikh
theology that Sikh theology is what it is.
Guru Nanak has, in the very first creedal statement with which Guru Granth Sahib begins described
the ‘One’ as Sat Nam, Karta Purukh. It is a reference to God and He is described as Karta Purkh. He is also,
both in the Scripture, as well as at the common and lay level, referred to as Kartar, the ‘Doer.’? The Gurus
have sought to convey their experience of the revelation in a somewhat unusual manner. Our efforts to
comprehend the uniqueness of this revelation will have to take due and proper notice of this underlined
nature of Sikh theology. The usual and the conditioned response will not do the required job. It is here that
most of the Western, as well as the Eastern, scholars have failed to understand what must be comprehended.
The creedal statement, popularly called Ma/ Mantra in Guru Granth Sahib, has only at a later stage referred to
God as Akal Murat. ‘The current use of Akal Purakh is historically of much later usage. The word Waheguru is
also very often used by scholars as well as lay Sikhs to refer to God. One of the recent Western attempts at
the expounding of the Sikh theology appears to have underlined only Akal Purakh and Waheguru as the core
concepts. Such an attempt often leads to the fusion of the Sikh dyanamism into the quiescence of the
theology and ethics prior to Sikhism. Once the Karta in the Karta Purakh is conveniently or unintentionally
lost sight of, two distortions emerge almost immediately. First, Guru Nanak has repeatedly stressed the
dynamic and the active nature of God as an example for humankind to follow. This is a very significant and
crucial identity of Guru Nanak’s message in the fifteenth century. The Karta Purakh is described as Nirbhau
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
(free from fear). Any scholar who fails to notice this identity in the fifteenth century is bound to feel puzzled
by the dynamic ethics of the subsequent Gurus. Such an error can be both intentional as well as
unintentional. The latter can be corrected when the scholar comes across the literature written on the original
lines. But when some scholars, even when aware of this position, remain persistent in their claims that
Sikhism has suddenly deviated from the path of the earlier Gurus during the later Gurus, we may not be
entirely wrong in doubting the bonafides of their unwarranted conclusion. We are all aware of the logical
difficulties of the theory of Karma prior to Sikhism. It is the revealed authority of the Guru’s imperative that
one ought not shun or escape from the duty of ethical actions. Such ethical actions, Guru Nanak and other
Gurus have told us, do not bind the person into the cycle of transmigration. This is in very sharp contrast
and total departure from the earlier held view of Karma. This departure is a complete discontinuity with the
earlier tradition and is the shaping of a new ethical identity. Second, the non-acceptance of the sacred thread
as initiation into the privileged three upper castes is a very significant ethical co-relate of the theology of Karta
Purakh. Nearly all the philosophers acquainted with the Indian Philosophy are aware of the doctrinal
implications of this identity. However, many anthropologists and historians seem to either not notice it or
reject it for reasons best known to themselves.
The absolute and the continuous identity of the ethical teaching from Guru Nanak’s par sach achar to
Guru Gobind Singh’s Shubh Karman te Kabhu na taru is easy to see and understand. The founders of the Sikh
religion were, obviously, stressing the continuity of the ethical chain. And this was being done in defiance of
the earlier notion that even the good actions or shubh karman bind the self to the sansara and, therefore, ought
to be renounced or abjured. The Gurus have totally departed from the earlier Indian ethics in this respect.
The law of Karma in the earlier Indian systems was the mainspring of the Warnasharama dharma, which
provided support to the institution of caste and the impulse for withdrawal from social participation. The
earlier social ethics was developed on an entirely different model. The Gurus, from Guru Nanak to Guru
Gobind Singh, gave up this model and instead developed the new structure of the ethics which universalised
the participatory role of action rather than restriction and withdrawal. This is an extremely important
development in Sikh ethics which has influenced the general Indian society subsequent to its emergence.
Even the general Indian society has gradually imbibed the teachings of the Gurus and there are many who
may be seen today to have rejected the earlier doctrine of Varnashrama dharma. A significantly large number
of contemporary Indian scholars and social leaders have derived remarkable inspiration from the teachings of
the Gurus on this score. Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Tagore, Vivekananda, and Radhakrishnan are only a few
names which may be mentioned but the list is large and impressive. The values of the social ethics
propounded by the Sikh Gurus have provided the impulse for many ideals of social concern and service as
witnessed by us in modern India. The insistence of the Gurus on freeing the social ethics from the caste
imperatives may not be so well appreciated in the changed social situation today, but its emergence and open
advocacy by the Gurus is the first and very modernising attempt to proclaim the freedom of man in the
Name of God. Freedom of the self is made the foundation of social freedom. Some of the ideals of freedom
proclaimed by the Western society in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries are very clearly perceived in the
teachings of the Gurus in the fifteenth to the eighteenth century India. This freedom is based on the spiritual
and social equality of human beings.
We may pause here and make a submission. In recent times some persons have sought to interpret
this love of Sikhism for freedom and equality as a struggle for some particular class of people. However,
their teaching for participation in the social life, as well as their ideal of freedom and equality, should not be
interpreted merely in material terms. The Gurus have always held the spiritual as higher than the material.
They taught us to regulate the material by the spiritual. Any effort for equality without inspiration by the
spiritual may tend to generate tension and conflict. But the Gurus have inspired freedom and equality from
the mainsprings of the spiritual which may initiate and sustain the progress towards the ideal of harmony and
equipoise. The Gurus have taught us that the basis for judging the issue are moral and spiritual. If an act is
wrong, then it is wrong regardless of whosoever has done it. Similarly, if it were right, then it is so regardless
of whosoever is involved in it. The tradition of holding even a colleague to be wrong, or serving water even
to your enemy is a teaching which is grounded in the spiritual principle. The issues are not judged on partisan
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
lines but are evaluated entirely on the moral and the spiritual grounds. In all this lies the strength and identity
of Sikh ethics.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
13
THE SIKH PANTH
JAGJIT SINGH
In view of their ideology, the Sikh Gurus could not rest content merely with preaching their
doctrines and leaving it at that. Their worldview impelled them to accept the challenges which the unjust
caste order and the religious and political domination posed. To solve these problems, it was imperative to
otganize people. Institutions like the caste system and the oppressive political state could be replaced only by
creating parallel institutions. There was no alternative to taking steps in this direction. Ignoring the
challenges would not have solved any of the problems, nor contributed to universal humanism. It was a very
difficult mission both to build new institutions, and at the same time maintain the spirit of universalism in the
mass organisation.
Idealism has, except as a source of inspiration, limited social utility if it is not properly organised for
social ends. This is amply illustrated by the negligible social impact of the Radical Bhakti ideology on the
caste society. If idealism is to be yoked to achieving social aims, it has got to be institutionalised. In the
process, it cannot escape assuming a certain distinctiveness and identity of its own. And greater the resistance
to the social change, the greater has to be the emphasise on the separate identity and organisation of the new
ideology.
1. DISTINCTIVENESS
The universal and non-sectarian gospel of Guru Nanak in itself became the first step in
differentiating the Sikh mission from the older creeds. In his time, the Indian atmosphere was surcharged
with hatred between Hindus and Muslims. They were further torn by extreme sectarian rivalry within their
own tanks. Religious votaties were pigeon-holed into one sect or the other. It was not common to rise
above narrow sectarian considerations. It was in this milieu that Guru Nanak declared that he was neither a
Hindu nor a Mussalman. To pointed questions at different places, he replied, “I am neither a Hindu, nor a
Mussalman. I accept neither the edas, nor the Quran.’””! “Tf I say I am a Hindu, I am lost altogether; at the
same time, Iam not a Mussalman.’? He advised the yogis to rise above sectarianism and regard the whole
humanity as their own.? Besides his numerous hymns, there is the evidence of the Janamsakhis that the
contemporaries of Guru Nanak were impressed by his universal humanitarian approach. When he visited the
tomb of Sheikh Baha-ud-Din Zakria in Multan, the Muslim priest observed, “We know you do not
discriminate between Hindus and Muslims.”* Guru Nanak advised a Muslim saint named Wali Kandhari not
to discriminate between Swnnis and Rafzies, because all sects belonged to God.> The Pathan Ubare Khan
recognised that the Guru was above Hindu or Muslim sectarianism.® When Guru Nanak settled at Kartarpur,
both Hindus and Muslims used to visit him.? Bhai Gurdas, a near contemporary of Guru Nanak, wrote :
“Hindus and Muslims, forsaking their sectarianism, began to worship Baba (Guru Nanak).’’? Coming under
the influence of Guru Nanak, ‘Hindus and Muslims shed off their sectarianism.’ At his death, Hindus and
Muslims both claimed the right to perform his last rites.? His image in the mind of the masses is reflected by
the popular saying : “Nanak Shah fakir is Guru to Hindus and Pir to the Muslims.’
Although the universalism of Guru Nanak lent its own distinctiveness to his message, the real reason
which made this differentiation deep and lasting, was that his gospel cut at the roots of some of the most
cherished faiths of both the Hindus and the Mussalmans. The Guru repudiated all claims to exclusive
religious authority by any prophet or scripture. The Sikh Gurus accepted no authority other than that of
God. “God being ineffable, Brahma and Vishnu have not found His limits; ...... He made millions of Indars
and Bawans; He created and destroyed Brahmas and Shivas.”!° Secondly, “In His court, there are hundreds of
thousands of Muhammads, Brahmas, Vishnus and Mahesh (Shivas).”!! As regards scriptures, Guru Nanak
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
says : “The drum of the Vedas resoundeth for many a faction. Remember God’s Name, Nanak, there is none
but Him.”’'? We have it on the authority of Dabistan that Sikhs “do not read the mantras (Le., the Vedic or
other scriptural hymns) of the Hindus, they do not venerate their temples of idols, nor do they esteem their
aviars. They have no regard for the Sanskrit language which, according to the Hindus, is the speech of the
angels.”!3 It has been seen that the demand for exclusive allegiance to religious source-heads was one of the
major causes of cleavage between the Hindus and the Mohammadans. The gospel of the Sikh Gurus struck
at this foundation on which the super-structure of the then existing religious sectarianism had been raised.
The grounds for the differentiation of the Gurus’ message from that of the caste ideology and the
caste society were far more basic. The caste ideology was the anti-thesis of humanism, and the caste society
was extremely parochial in its outlook. To belong to it, it was necessary to be born within it. The land where
the Varna Ashrama Dharma was not established, was regarded impure;'+ and the Aryavarta, the pure land, was
at one period circumscribed within the limits of the river Sindh in the north and the river Carmanvati in the
South.!5 The Sikh Gurus rejected almost all the cardinal beliefs of the caste society. They repudiated the
authority of the Vedas and allied scriptures, discarded the theory of avfarhood, disowned all its sectarian gods,
goddesses and avyars, and condemned idol worship, formalism, ritualism, and ceremonialism.
The ideology of the Sikh Gurus, thus, stood differentiated by its own logic. Its universality and
humanism were compatible neither with Muslim exclusiveness, nor with the caste-ridden and sectarian
orthodox Hindu society.
2. SEPARATE IDENTITY
Mere ideological distinctiveness was not enough. The greatest social hurdle in the way of humanism
was the inequitous caste system. It could not be reformed from within. For, social inequality and
hierarchism were in-built in its very constitution and mechanism. The anti-caste movements could survive
only if these divorced themselves from the caste society. Buddhism organised a monastic society outside the
caste ranks. But, it left its laity to remain in the caste fold. The result was that, when Brahminism reasserted
itself, the lay followers of Buddhism imperceptibly moved into their caste moorings, leaving the order of
monks, high and dry, in its isolation. Kabir was far more vocal than Basawa, but the Lingayats established a
far more separate identity than the Kabir-panthis; because their deviations (e.g., widow remarriage, burying
the dead and admission of all castes) from the caste usages were very radical. Later, the Lingayats tried to
tone down their radicalism. But, inspite of this, they are, perhaps, more an appendage of the orthodox
society than its integral part; because even the toned down Lingayatism is not wholly adjustable in the caste
otder.'6 Chaitanya, who was more radical with regard to caste restrictions than the Maharashtra Bhaktas, had
both low caste Hindus and Muslims as his disciples. In the Kartabha sect, which branched out of the
Chaitanya School, there is no distinction between Hindus, Muslims and Christians. A Muslim has more than
once tisen to the rank of a teacher. The members of the sect eat together once or twice in a year.'7 But, the
main body of the followers of Chaitanya reverted to the caste society; and even its Kartabhai section, like the
Lingayats, does not assert a distinct entity apart from the caste society. The creed of Kabir attained the stage
of only a Mafra (religious path), although of all the denouncers of caste considerations, he was the most
unequivocal and vocal. The Kabir-panth remained a loose combination of those who were attracted by
Kabir’s religious appeal, or were attracted by some other considerations (e.g., ju/ahas [weavers], who
constituted the majority of the Kabir-panthis, were attracted to Kabir because he was a judaha)."®
These instances leave no doubt that anti-caste movements, like those of Kabir and other Bhaktas,
whose departure from the caste ideology had been confined only to the ideological plane, remained still-born
in the field of social achievement. And, those like the Lingayats and the followers of Chaitanya, who, under
the influence of a teacher, did adopt certain anti-caste usages, but either they did not want to break away
completely from the caste society, or did not pursue their aim consistently enough, remained tagged to the
caste order in one form or the other. The Buddhist monks alone could escape being swallowed by the caste
society, because they had made a complete break with the caste order, both ideologically and organizationally.
Accordingly, in the mediaeval period, the chances of success of any anti-caste movement were in direct
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
proportion to the separate identity it established outside the caste society, both at the ideological and the
organizational levels. And the foremost prerequisite for this purpose was a clear perception of this aim, a
determined will and a consistent effort to pursue it.
The separate identity of the Sikh Pantb and the Sikh movement is such a patent fact of history that it
is hardly questioned. This by itself is a clear indication of the fact that the Sikh Gurus had a definite aim of
giving their message a distinct and new organizational form. Otherwise, it is hard to explain why the Sikh
movement should not have met the same fate as that of Lingayats and the followers of Kabir and Chaitanya.
The Sikh Gurus realised, which the others did not, that, in order to give battle to the caste order, it was
imperative to build a social system and organise people outside the caste-society. This process of establishing
a separate society (the Sikh Panth) started with Guru Nanak himself.
Guru Nanak began his career as a teacher of men with the significant utterance that “there is no
Hindu and no Mussalman.” The Guru thereby wanted to emphasise the eternal unity and brotherhood of
man. For the Guru, everybody was primarily a man and not a Hindu or a Mussalman. The same Janamsakhi,
which gives the above story proceeds to say : “Then Guru Baba Nanak gave all his earthly belongings and
went to join the company of fakirs (1.e., Muslim recluses) ...... Then people asked him, ‘Nanak, earlier you
were something else, i.c., Hindu, now you have become different. There is the one path of the Hindus, and
the other that of Mussalmans; which path do you follow ? Then Guru Baba Nanak said, “There is no
Hindu, no Mussalman; which of these paths can I follow ? I follow God’s path. God is neither Hindu nor
Mussalman. I follow God’s right path.’
Guru Nanak’s reply clearly indicates his complete break with his Hindu past. Guru Nanak clarified
unambiguously that he was rejecting both the Hindu and the Muslim paths, and instead, was following God’s
right path, because God was neither Hindu nor Mussalman. In other words, the Guru rejects the Hindu and
the Muslim paths, not because of the shortcomings of their followers, but mainly because God is non-
sectarian.
We have seen that the Radical Bhaktas were not Hindu reformers. If all that they rejected is taken
out of Brahminism, there is nothing of substance left that the orthodox religion could claim as exclusively its
own. This applies doubly to Guru Nanak’s ideology, because he was even more vehement in his criticism of
Brahminism and its scriptures and practices.
The Janamsakhis also make it clear that Guru Nanak’s mission was non-sectarian, and in the context
of the times, a new path. “God sent (Nanak) to start a panth (religion). “Nobody could make out whether
he was a Hindu or a Muslim.’’?! Two Qazis who came to see him, came to the conclusion that he was the pir
of both Hindus and Muslims. “You carry conviction with (both) Hindus and Muslims.’’2 “Then it became a
current topic of discussion among Hindus and Muslims ...... What is his religion ? He does not follow any
one of the paths of Yogis, Sanyasis, Tapasvis, Oaxis, Mullahs, Hindus, Muslims, Vedas and Katebs ......°° A Hindu
Khatri complained to the Delhi Sultan that “he does not recognise the authority of either Vedas or Kateb.4
He went to preach his message in Muslim countries, and was warned of the hazards to his life for
doing so. If he had been a mere Hindu reformer or a sectarian, there was no point in his going to far off
lands, because no Hindu could ever contemplate converting Muslims to Hinduism. In addition, we have the
evidence of Bhai Gurdas who wrote : “(Guru Nanak) vanquished the Sidhas in discussion, and made a
separate Panth of his own.”* “Opening the Book, (they) asked who is better, Hindu or Mussalman ?’’6
“(Guru Nanak replied) They (Hindus and Mussalmans) quarrel with each other, (but) Ram and Rahim are on
the same footing.”?’ “Nanak struck his own coin in this world, and created a pute Panth.’”’8
Purther, Guru Nanak took clear organizational steps in shaping a Sikh society on separate ideological
lines. He established dharmsalas in far-flung places inside the country and outside it.2? These dharmsalas
became the centres where his followers could meet together, practise the dbarm of his concept, and spread his
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
message to others. In addition, he appointed select persons (wanjis) for the purpose of furthering his
mission.” In his lifetime, his followers came to be known as Nanakpanthis, and they had their own separate
way of saluting each other (Sat Kartar).!
The greatest single organizational step that Guru Nanak took was to select, by a system of tests, a
worthy successor to lead and continue his mission. He was named Angad, Le., a limb of Guru Nanak
himself. It is recorded in Guru Granth Sahib that the change-over from Nanak to his successors meant only
a change of bodily forms, otherwise, the same light shone in them and they followed the same course.*? Bhai
Gurdas also writes that Guru Nanak established a pure Panth, blended his light with that of Angad, and
nominated him in his place as the Guru of that Pantb.>> Guru Nanak directed his successor Guru Angad not
to remain absorbed wholly in meditation, but to devote his time to the shaping of the Panth.*+ The same
instructions were passed on by Angad to his successor Amar Das,* and this mission was continued by the
later Gurus.*6 This evidence is of great value because it embodies an altogether new tradition. This could be
true only of the Sikh Gurus, because nowhere else in the Indian religious tradition were social objectives
given preference over personal spiritual bliss.
Guru Nanak had started the institution of dharamsalas (religious centres), sangat (congregations of his
followers), /angar (common kitchen and manjis (seats of preaching). The succeeding Gurus further
consolidated and extended these institutions. Guru Amar Das systematised this institution of manjis, and
created twenty-two centres for the extension of the mission. Persons of high religious calibre were
nominated to these offices. They were in charge of the Guru’s followers in an area, and catered to their
religious as well as temporal needs. They were the links of the organization and two-way channels of
communication between the Guru and the sangat. They collected the offerings, and passed the same on to the
central treasury, where these were used by the Guru for the purposes of the mission. Guru Arjun regularised
the collection of these contributions. He required every Sikh to set apart one tenth of his income for the
common cause. When Guru Nanak settled at Kartarpur after completing his missionary tours, the place
became the central dharamsala, the focal meeting place for his followers. Guru Amar Das made Goindwal the
centre of his mission. He fixed two occasions when the Guru’s followers should come from far and near for
general meetings of the Panth. Guru Ram Das and Guru Arjun extended these centres to Tarn Taran and
Amritsar. In the course of time, the latter place became to the Sikhs what Mecca is to the Muslims.
In addition to the consolidation of these institutions initiated by Guru Nanak, Guru Angad invented
the Gurmukhi script and Guru Arjun compiled the Sikh scripture. These two steps went a long way in
establishing the separate identity of the Sikhs. With a distinct organization, separate religious centres, a
separate script, and a scripture of their own, they became an entirely separate church and a new society. It is
not out purpose to go into the details of the organizational steps taken by the Gurus, but it may be
mentioned that the militarisation of the movement, as will be seen, only added a new dimension to this
development. Even before this militarisation, the Sikh movement had established a firm and a separate
organizational identity known as the Sikh Panth.
3. IDENTITY AND UNIVERSALITY
While repudiating claims of others to exclusive religious authority, the Sikh Gurus did not advance
any such claim on their own behalf. Guru Nanak calls himself “lowest of the low.’3? Guru Ram Das
describes himself to be the meanest of the whole creation*® and Guru Gobind Singh regards himself as “the
slave of the Supreme Being.’”’® Of the ten Sikh Gurus, the hymns of seven have been recorded. In not a
single hymn do they indicate any claim to exclusive religious authority. It was Guru Gobind Singh, the
creator of the brotherhood of the Khalsa — a body devoted to the service of humanity — who specifically
made it clear that the Hindu temple and the mosque, are the same; and that the whole humanity is to be
regarded as one.*”
The single greatest step that the Sikh Gurus took to prevent religious authority becoming the source
of sectarianism was to detach ideology from the person of the ideologue. It was the eternal spirit, the
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
doctrine, the tenet, or the principle, which was made supreme over and above the person or the teacher, the
Guru or the prophet. When Guru Nanak nominated Angad as his successor, he (Nanak) laid his head at the
feet of Angad as a mark of homage.*! It is significant that Guru Nanak did not bow before Lehna (1.e., the
disciple who was not yet perfect), but bowed before Angad, the person who had then become the head and
represented the spirit of the mission. As soon as the same spirit was enshrined in both, the distinction
between the Guru and the disciple was obliterated. Satta and Balwand, in their hymns recorded in Guru
Granth Sahib, and Bhai Gurdas, have made this point absolutely clear, “The light was the same, the system
was the same, the only change was a change of bodies.” “Nanak blended his light with his (Angad’s light),
(and in this way) the Satguru Nanak transformed his form.” Not only the distinction between one Guru and
the other Guru disappeared, but the distinction between the Guru and all those Sikhs who had imbibed in
toto the Guru’s spirit, also disappeared. Guru Hargobind touched the feet of Bhai Budha to pay him
homage. And by conferring Guruship on Guru Granth Sahib, Guru Gobind Singh emphasised two points.
First, that the Guruship was not embodied in any person but in the principle and the spirit he enshrined; and
second, that it was the ideology that mattered, and not its source, because, the hymns of the Bhakti saints
incorporated in Guru Granth Sahib were to be as sacred to the Sikhs as the hymns of the Sikh Gurus.
The Sikh tradition is replete with instances showing the cosmopolitan spirit of the Sikh Gurus. “The
Hindus reject Muslims, and the Muslims reject the Hindus. God has ordained me (Nanak) to act upon the
four Katebs. The merit does not lie in reading or hearing them, but lies in living them in life.’4 Guru Amar
Das sent Prema to a Muslim saint for getting himself cured,*° and made Alayar, a Muslim, one of his priests,
who drew no distinction between Hindus and Muhammadans.*” Guru Arjun incorporated in Guru Granth
Sahib the hymns of two Muslim saints, Farid and Bhikan, thus giving them equal status with the hymns of
the Gurus. He got the foundation stone of the premier Sikh temple laid by the famous Sufi saint, Mian Mir.
Guru Hargobind, who was the first to raise the standard of armed revolt against the Mughals, and fought six
battles against them, built, on his own, a mosque when he founded the new township of Hargobindpur.* It
was Guru Gobind Singh who created the Khalsa to wage a relentless struggle against the religious and
political tyranny of the Mughal empire, but his hymns leave no doubt about his cosmopolitan approach :
“What is a Hindu or Muslim to him, from whose heart doubt departeth.”4 At a period when Muslim
sentiment against the Sikhs had crystallised, many a noble spirit among the Muslims recognised the non-
sectarian character of the Guru’s mission. Budhu Shah was a known Muslim divine. He himself, his brother,
his four sons and seven hundred disciples fought for the Guru. During the struggle, two of his sons died
fighting,*° and he himself was tortured to death by Osman Khan for having sided with the Guru.>! Saiyed
Beg, one of Aurangzeb’s generals, who was in command of five thousand men, changed his mind at a critical
moment in the course of the battle, and “threw in his lot with the Sikhs, and contributed all his wealth
towards their struggle against the Muhammadans ......”52 Later, Saiyed Beg died fighting for the Guru in
another action.*> Another general, Satyed Khan, sent by the Emperor Aurangzeb to subdue the Guru, also
left the imperial forces, and voluntarily submitted himself to the Guru.*+ By far the best instance of the
cosmopolitan spirit of the movement is the story of Kanahiya, who, during the critical battle at Anandpur,
used to offer water and assistance with absolute impartiality to the wounded both among the Sikhs and the
enemy forces. When questioned, Kanahiya quoted the Guru’s own instructions that one should look on all
men with an equal eye. The Guru complimented him for displaying the true spirit of a Sikh.®> The author of
Hakikat attested to it in 1783 (i.e., after the Sikhs had passed through the severest persecution at the hands of
the Muslim rulers) that, “In his (Nanak’s) religion, there is very little prejudice against the Muslims, nay, they
have practically no prejudice against any nation.”
It is important to understand that this cosmopolitan Sikh tradition could not be born either out of
Muslim exclusiveness, or the caste ideology of the Hindus. Only the Radical Bhaktas shared this outlook,
but they never ventured in the social or organizational field. The Bhaktamala, the only earlier record of their
lives, does not mention the shaping of any such tradition. Therefore, the very existence and persistence of
the Sikh tradition is a strong indication of the universal character of the Sikh movement.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
The really important point to be noted is that for the practice of their universal humanism, the Sikh
Gutus established the forums of the Sikh Panth. Their universalism had distinct social aims. This was their
major difference with the Radical Bhaktas who never tried to institutionalise their ideology. The Sikh Gurus
were deeply committed to achieving practical social goals. It was the inner compulsion both of their religion
and universalism that prompted them to create a new path and a Panth, so as to give practical shape to a
programme that directly militated, on the one hand, against the caste ideology and, on the other, against the
Shariat of the ruling Islam in India. Just as in the case of the doctrine of ahimsa, they did not make a fetish of
universalism so as to allow it to be used as a cover for inaction, and for ignoring their avowed social goals.
The Gurus never wanted the Hindus to remain as Hindus in a manner which left the caste system and its
anti-humanism intact. Similarly, they did not want the Muslims to remain as Muslims in a manner which led
to Shariatic exclusiveness and, its corollary, the religious domination over non-Muslims. All that Guru
Nanak wanted was that Hindus should be Hindus of his concept, and that Muslims should be Muslims of his
concept. His hymns leave no doubt on this issue. For these clearly commend the acceptance of values and
virtues instead of the formalism and ritualism of the old religions. “Make kindness thy mosque, sincerity thy
prayer carpet; and what is just and lawful thy Quran. Modesty thy circumcision; civility thy fasting; so shall
thou be a Musalman.”’>’ “A Musalman is he who cleaneth his impurity.’*° “(A Muslim) dwells on the Shariat.
But, they alone are perfect who surrender their self to see God.’’>° “He who instructeth all the four castes in
the Lord’s Wisdom, Nanak, such a Pandit I salute for ever.” “Yoga is neither in the patched coat, nor in the
yogt’s staff, nor in besmearing oneself with ashes ...... If one looketh upon all the creation alike, he is
acclaimed as a true yogi.”6! This meant pure and simple humanism and the abolition of all those institutions
which were unjust or aggressive. The creation of parallel institutions to replace the anti-humanistic ones,
e.g., the caste society and the tyrannical state, was an indispensable prerequisite. It was for this purpose that
the Sikh Gurus organised the Sikh Panth. But, they scrupulously maintained the spirit of humanism and
universality in that organisation. The universalism of the Sikh Gurus was not of that hue which is self-
satisfied in remaining in an amorphous state and does not aspire institutionalisation for a humanitarian
purpose. At the same time, the Sikh Panth was not created just to add another sect; it was established to serve
an egalitarian cause.
REFRENCES
. Janamsakhi, Bhai Bala, p. 292.
. Janamsakhi, Bhai Mani Singh Wali (Janamsakhi Prampra, edited by Kirpal Singh, Antka, p. 333).
Guru Granth Sahib, p. 6.
. Janamsakhi Meharbanwah, edited by Kirpal Singh, p. 439.
. Janamsakhi, Bhai Bala, p. 270; Janamsakhi Prampra, Antka, p. 307.
. Ibid. p. 293.
. Janamsakhi, Walaitwah, Sakhi Guru Angad ji nun Guriayee, Janamsakhi, Meharbanwah, p. 517.
Bhai Gurdas, Var One, Pauri 34.
. Janamsakhi,Walaitwah, Sakhi Guru Angad ji nun Guriayee, Janamsakhi Prampra, Antka, pp. 57,
401.
10. Macauliffe, Vol. V, p. 262.
11. Janamsakhi, Bhai Mani Singh Wali (Janamsakhi Prampra, Antka, p. 334.)
12. Macauliffe, Vol. I, p. 369.
13. Dabistan, trans. by Ganda Singh : The Panjab Past and Present (1969), p. 51.
14. Max Weber, p. 7.
15. Alberuni’s India,Vol. Il, p. 134.
16.Tara Chand, p. 117.
17. Ibid., pp. 219-220.
18.Rose, Vol. IL, p. 419.
19. Janamsakhi, Meharban Wah, pp. 10-12.
CONAMKRWONSE
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
20. Ibid., p. 89.
21. Janamsakhi Prampra, Antka, p. 174.
22. Ibid., p. 204.
23. Ibid., p. 200.
24. Janamsakhi Bhai Bala, p. 279. Latif, p. 245.
25.Bhai Gurdas, Var One, Pauri 31.
26. Ibid., Pauri 33.
27. Ibid.
28. Ibid., Pauri 45.
29. Janamsakhi Prampra, Antka, pp. 124, 125, 127,174, ete.
30. Ibid., pp. 44, 48, 259, 268.
31. Ibid, pp. 106, 110, 121, 124, 127, 131, 133, 132, ete.
32.Guru Granth Sahib, p. 966.
33.Bhai Gurdas, Var One, Pauri 45.
34. Mehma Parkash, I, p, 326; II, p. 9.
35. Ibid., II, p. 57.
36. Ibid., pp. 95, 103, 233, 358.
37.Gutu Granth Sahib, p. 15.
38. Ibid., p. 1295.
39. Macauliffe, Vol. V, p. 300.
40. Ibid., pp. 275-6.
41. Janamsakhi Walaitwah, Sakhi Guriayee Guru Angad.
42.Guru Granth Sahib, p. 966.
43. Bhai Gurdas, Var One, Pauri, 45.
44. Gurbilas Chhevin Patshabi, p. 341.
45. Mehma Parkash, I, p. 217.
46. Ibid., II, p. 246.
47.Macauliffe, H, p. 77.
48. Gurbilas Chhevin Patshahi, pp. 337, 340.
49.Macauliffe, Vol. V, p. 308.
50.Macauliffe, Vol. V, pp. 33, 37, 38, 42.
51.Ganda Singh : The Panjab Past and Present, Oct., 1975, p. 446.
52.Macauliffe, Vol. V, pp. 153-154.
53. Ibid., p.162.
54. Ibid., p. 163.
55. Ibid., pp. 173-174; Koer Singh, Garbilas Patshabi Das, pp. 189-190.
56. Indian Historical Quarterly, March, 1942 sup., p. 3; Rose, I, p. 688.
57.Macauliffe, Vol. I, p. 38.
58.Ibid., p. 339.
59.Guru Granth Sahib, p. 465.
60. Ibid., p. 274.
61. Ibid., p. 730.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
14
NATHISM
DALJEET SINGH
As the words Nath yogis indicate, Nathism is a Saiva cult employing fundamentally Yogic ideology
and methodology.
1. HISTORY OF THE SECT
Saivism’s combination with yoga has probably the longest religious history in the country. Seals of
Shiva in a yogic pose have been found in the Indus valley or Harappan excavations. Shiva is generally
believed to be a pre-Rig Vedic and non-Aryan god. [3. pp. 13-15, 2. p. 259]. He is also mentioned as a
god in the Vedas, Upanishads and the Mahabharata. [3. p. 115]. He is a feared god in the Rig Veda. [5. p.
106]. Lord Krishna acknowledged his greatness and got a boon from him. The Nath yogis belong to an
ascetic group of Saivism. [5. pp. 112-15]. Asceticism as a spiritual tool to gain supernatural powers, has been
accepted by all the old systems like Jainism, Yoga, Saivism and the Vedic religion. In the Rig Veda, the hairy
Muni in ecstasy is extolled when he drinks poison with Rudra. [3. pp. 15-19, 2. pp. 210-11, and AB Keith, ‘Rig
Veda’, Vol. I. p. 402]. The oldest Saiva system is the Pasupata. It has been mentioned in Asbarvasiras
Upanishad and the Mahabharata. |3. pp. 115-16, 5. pp. 112-15]. The Nath yogis are not only directly connected
with it, but are also a part of the group called Lakula that has directly developed from the parent Pasupata.
This group includes the Kanphata yogis, the Kala Mukhas, the Kapalikas, Aghorpanthies, etc. [2. p. 218]. In
this group, four elements are basic and common, namely, asceticism and renunciation of the world, yogic
methodology with emphasise on Mantra yoga and Hath yoga, the combination and worship of male and
female deities, and the goal of gaining powers, liberation from the world, and merger with Shiva. [3. pp. 128,
133, 2. pp. 112-15]. The Kapalikas are the precursors of Gorakhnathis. Rather, there is no material difference
between the two except that Gorakhnathis are comparatively a little moderate in their practices.
In all these systems there is emphasise on the combination of male and female energies, Shiva and
Shakti, Znga and yoni, Purusa and Prakirti, etc. [2. pp. 163-64, 171-73]. The female part is represented by Uma,
Parvati, Durga and Shakti. The group is noted for its wild, erotic and abhorrent practices and blood
sacrifices. [2. pp. 116, 171-72].
As is well-known, all yoga, especially Hath yoga, is generally done in order to gain miraculous
physical and psychical powers. It is a very old belief that the yogi can do anything and is the master of nature.
[2. pp. 270-71, and Radhakrishnan Indian Philosophy, Vol. I, p. 336].
The four elements mentioned above have been present in these systems from the earliest times. The
worship of /ga and_yoni was there in the Lakula Group including Kanphatas. The Kapalika system, which is
nearest to the Naths, has been mentioned in the Upanishads. [2. pp. 171-73]. The sect existed before the
Christian era and the time of Kena Upanishad. [3. pp. 117-18]. The Kanphata line started with Machhendra
Nath, who is the first historical Nath. Gorakhnath is probably the third Nath, though some say that six Naths
intervened between the two. [2. pp. 229-30]. It is generally believed that Gorakhnath appeared any time
between the 11th and the 14th century. But according to Briggs, who has considered all evidence on the
point, he lived in the 12th century A.D. [2. p. 249].
2. LEGENDARY HISTORY
It is common in India that whenever a cult breaks away from the parent sect, the devotees of the new
cult create numerous legends about its author by giving him both the highest spiritual status and maximum
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
antiquity. The legendary history of Gorakhnath is very variant. One legend says that he is the original deity
and Shiva, Brahma and Vishnu are his disciples; another version calls him the av/ar of Shiva, who appears in
all Yugas. In the Satyuga, he appeared at Tilla in Jhelum district, Pakistan. [2. p. 228]. But, the generally
accepted legend about the Nath is that once Shiva was imparting to Parvati the secret mantra for spiritual
realization, Machhendra Nath, who was lying as a fish near by, heard and grasped the mantra. [2. p. 231].
Though Lord Shiva is supposed to be the first Nath (Adinath), [2. pp. 228-30, 98]. Machhendra Nath is the
first human Nath. [2. pp. 230-31]. In that lineage, Gorakhnath is probably the third or the ninth Nath to get
the secret mantra. [2. pp. 231-49]. In the course of time, this mantra, it is believed, was received by
Janeshvara, the famous commentator of the Gita, Chatanya and Tukaram. [2. pp. 234-35]. It is this secret
mantra which is possessed by Naths of this cult.
3. THE METAPHYSICAL VIEW AND APPROACH TO THE WORLD
Saivism has a variety of metaphysical views regarding the world. In the Pasupata system, the parent
system of Naths, Ishwara and Pradhana are the cause of everything. Pradhana produces the world, or effects
(arya), including souls. The effects are of three kinds, the soul (fash), ‘cognition’ and ‘organs.’ The ‘effects’
are dependent on Shiva, who is the cause of everything. But the effect, the created soul, is eternal. Shiva is
the original cause, on which the effects depend. [5. pp. 121-123]. In the Pasupata system, the chief aim is to
gain powers. The world, though real, is considered to be in fetters, from the bondage of which release has to
be sought. In essence, thus, the Naths accept the philosophy and approach of yoga, which is dualistic and
seeks the liberation of purusha from the meshes of prakritt. [5. pp. 121-23]. In Nathism, too, the world is
deemed to be a place of misery which has to be renounced as an entanglement. Irrespective of the fact
whether Nathism is dualistic or monistic, its approach to the world remains the same as that of yoga. It is
said that Shiva being fed up with creation, cut off his organ. [3. pp. 114-16]. That is why the yogis are ascetic
and are associated with cremation grounds. The ashes on the body of the Nath represent cremation ashes.
Shiva is called maha yogi and has been shown in the garb of a yogi. The Nath yogis, too, take a vow of
celibacy and altogether shun the world of man.
4. THE GOAL
Being basically akin to yoga, Naths have a goal which, even though slightly variant in its description,
is in essence, the same as in yoga. In yoga, the goal is three fold, to gain power, to be liberated from the
world, and to seek isolation. In Nathism, the first two objects of the goal are the same. [3. p. 114, 2. pp. 137-
8, 258-64, 270-73, 324, 343]. The final state is called Kaivalya or isolation of purusha in a state of mindless
unconsciousness. In Nathism, too, the final goal is of complete dissociation from the world, involving a
wholly passive and blissful union with, or merger in, Shiva. [3. pp. 116-18]. The difference in the goals is in
name only. In both cases, it is a state of complete inactivity. In one case, the purusha shines in its own light;
in the case of Nathism, the soul shines in the eternal light of Shiva. In both cases, the primary object is to
gain powers and seek liberation from the oppression of the world. [2. pp. 261-64, 269-71, 324].
5. ORGANISATION, METHODOLOGY AND DISCIPLINE
Let us now give the rationale, the routine and the practices of the religious life of the Naths and the
physical and spiritual discipline observed by them.
(i) The Organisation : The Nath system being ascetic and monastic, they have a number of
monasteries all over the country. The important centres are Tilla Jhelum district, Pakistan), Hinglaj
(Baluchistan), Dhinodhar (Kuchh), Gorakhpur and Devi Pattan (U.P.), etc. [2. pp. 102-5]. All yogis are
members of one monastery or the other, and each monastery is headed by a pir or guru. Since even Muslims
are accepted in the faith (at one time there were over 38,000 Muslim Naths), the heads of the centres at
Hinglaj and Tilla, which are situated in the Muslim areas, are called pirs. Actually, the head of the important
monastery at Hinglaj was a Muslim, and the complaint was that visitors to that centre were converted to
Islam. [2. p. 106]. Every person initiated among the Naths is accepted by a guru of some monastery, of which
the new entrant becomes a member. There are twelve sects of Aanphatas. Each was organised by a disciple of
Gorakhnath. [2. p. 62].
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
The disciple has to take three important vows. He has to be a celibate. Further, he undertakes not
to engage himself in any business, employment or profession and has to sustain himself by begging for his
food. Thirdly, he has to observe abimsa. [2. p. 28]. The yogi is advised to live in a place where the area is not
disturbed, the king is good and alms are freely available. There, he has to choose a solitary place for his
meditation and yoga. [2. pp. 1-5, 28]. After the yogi is accepted as a probationer, he is supposed to walk on
both sides of the river Narbada. The period of probation may extend to anything from one year to a much
longer period. When the person is finally accepted as a yogi, his ears are split. By it a mystic channel or Nadi
is opened up. [2. pp. 5-6, 30]. The yogi travels barefooted. Except for the four rainy months, the yogi is on
the move to different Nath monasteries and other Hindu places of pilgrimage. He wears the scantiest of
clothes and goes almost naked. He rubs ashes on his body and wears earrings in his split ears. The madras
should preferably be of the horns of a rhino. The yogi wears a necklace of Rudraksha beads and also a
special thread. In addition, he carries a whistle. These three items are called the sas. The loss of any of
these items involves stoppage of the eating of food till it is replaced. [3. p. 134]. The daily routine involves
begging, and at that time he wears kerchiefs round his arms. The madra is so important that if the same is
broken, the yogi would not take food; nor can he perform religious rites or talk to his fellow yogis till the
same is substituted. [3. pp. 8-9]. The Naths bury their dead.
(it) Monasteries And Places Of Worship : It is of religious significance and merit to visit Nath
monasteries, particularly, Tilla, Hinglaj, Dharmodhar, etc., and sacred Hindu rivers and places of pilgrimage
like Haridwar, Prayag, Ganga, Godawari, Benaras, Ajudhia, Brindaban, Badrinath, Kedarnath, Pushkar, etc.
At the monasteries, there are temples, images and pictures of Hindu gods and religious presonalities like
Dattartreya, Krishna and gopies, Ram Chandra, Hanuman, Lakshman and others. Shiva in the form of
Bhairon is worshipped. [2. pp. 78-86, 3. p. 137]. Homage is paid to Hindu gods. Dattatreya and Hanuman
are also worshipped by the Ranphatas. In Bengal, the Naths worship both Shiva and Vishnu. At their centres,
blood sacrifices are done at the Bhairon temple and at some tombs. [2. pp. 94-96].
(itl) Caste And Social Distinctions : In theory, only twice born are initiated as Naths. At Tilla, the
recruits are only from the first three castes. But, elsewhere, all castes, except some very low castes like
Meghwalis and Dheds, are accepted. [2. pp. 26-27]. Women are generally not initiated except widows.
[3.p.133] Hindu Naths do not eat with Muslim Naths. [2. p. 27]. Nor do Naths go for begging to Muslim
houses or houses of lower castes. [2. p. 45]. “None but a Brahmin ascetic can cook the meals and serve them
at any of the ascetic centres extant today, whether Saiva or Vaishnava. Likewise, the worship of the deity
remains his privilege and presetve.” [3. p. 228]. At Dhinodhar monastery, the higher castes are given
uncooked food. The other castes are fed at the monastery hall, but lower castes and Muslims get food
outside the monastery in the open. [2. p. 45, 3. pp. 27, 47]. Naths do not sit and eat with their womenfolk,
nor even with women Nath-panthis. Many Naths do marry, but the married lot are held in contempt by
others. The other Naths do not smoke with them till they have paid a penalty. [3. p. 139].
(iv) Rekgious Discipline : The Nath yogis have four prominent elements of their discipline : (a)
asceticism, (b) ritualism, (c) yogic methodology, and (d) the combination of male and female energies and the
raising of the Aundalani with the view to attain union with Lord Shiva. In order to understand these features,
we shall briefly trace the history of each of them and indicate the Nath practices. It is relevant to understand
that despite the lapse of time and the modern environment, the Naths have not even slightly modified their
practices which continue as of old. [3. p. 139].
(a) Absceticism: Asceticism is a typically ancient Indian institution. It is believed to be an Indian
contribution to world cultures, since asceticism was unknown to the ancient Iranian, Babylonian or Egyptian
cultures. It appears to belong to the pre-Aryan or the Sramanic tradition. [3. pp. 1-3]. Harappan seals
represent Shiva in an ascetic pose. Jainism particularly extols the power and value of ‘apas (hard discipline
and austerity) [3. p. 18-19]. In the Rig Veda, too, the force and merit of Tapas have been recognised. The
Satpatha Brabmana says that God created the earth through Tapas. The epics and the Upanishads, too, accept
the significance and supernatural powers of asceticism. This is especially so from the time of Kena
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Upanishad. Manu has prescribed the conditions and rules for the austere life. [2. pp. 208-10]. In the Rg
Veda, the hairy muni in ecstasy is praised as having divine power who could drink with Rudra from a poison
cup. [2. pp. 210-11]. Svetaketu was an Upanishadic philosopher, law-giver and Jnani, a contemporary of
Yajnavalkya. [3. p. 30]. He, too, was an ascetic. Sanaka, whom libations are offered as a Vedic sage, was a
brahamacharya. There were many other ascetic Hindu sages. [3. pp. 27-30]. Even before the time of Buddha,
the theory of four ashramas provided that half the period of life should be devoted to ascetic living.
Dattatreya, deemed to be an incarnation of Vishnu, was a celibate. Even Yajnavalkya says that wise men,
without becoming householders, straightaway take to the life of mendicants. It was considered the right and
proper course for spiritual endeavour and self-realisation. [3. p. 24]. Chandogya goes a step further, calling
“Such brahmacharya as not only one of the pillars of rigtheousness, but as a state that ensures Brahma—
realisation.” [3. pp. 24-25]. Mundaka Upanishad, too, recommends samyasa for final salvation. Even
Yajnavalkya says, “Having known Him, one becomes a muni, sage or wise one. Desiring the same end,
recluses renounce the world. For that very purpose, wise men of old used not to desire progeny.” “With this
thought, they used to take to the life of mendicancy.” “For, desire for progeny is desire for goods.”
“Brahmins having known Him, practise the life of mendicants.” “There are schools of asceticism which have
raised the physical part of it to be an ideal in itself, whether as a contortive activity or as the esoteric Hath
yoga.” [3. pp. 24-32].
It is thus clear that both in the Pre-Aryan Sramanic tradition and the Vedic-Upanishadic tradition,
asceticism, celibacy and otherwordliness have been taken to be the principal means of salvation and
knowledge. Buddha did strike a mean path; but with him, too, world was a dukkha and monasticism became
a basic part of his system for nirvana. It is this tradition of asceticism and liberation from miseries of the
world the Nath yogis accept as an integral part of their system. Because the vows of Nath yogis provide for
celibacy and non-engagement in any business or employment, Shiva, who is called the maha _yogi, is always
associated with wilderness and cremation grounds. That is why the Nath yogis have the ritual of rubbing
ashes on their bodies, representing thereby death to worldly connections. [2. pp. 16-17].
(b) Rétualism And Formalism : Ritualism has a definite place and value in the system. Certain months,
December to April, are considered auspicious for initiation into the system. [2. p. 27]. At initiation, the
disciple sits in a particular posture and faces north. Mantras are read at the time of initiation and splitting the
eats. These are supposed to have distinct potency and value in preventing pain and bleeding in the process.
Rhino horn earrings are preferred because it is a sacred animal. [2. pp. 8, 32-33]. The splitting of the ear has
great potency and makes a person immortal. [2. p. 6]. In case the split ear is mutilated, the Nath is
excommunicated. In earlier years, he either died or was buried alive. [2. p. 8, 3. pp. 134-35]. Ifa mudra is lost,
the yogi must substitute it before he can take food, perform religious rites or talk to his fellow yogis. [2. p. 8].
As we shall mention under the sub-head yoga, Mantra Yoga has a definite value in achieving spiritual
advancement. Belief in the mystic potency of words and letters and their repetition is an integral part of the
system. This is so especially regarding the word Om.
Fasting is considered very efficacious. It removes sins. Fasting on Shivratri is particularly meritorious
and makes a person immortal. [2. pp. 142-43]. May be because of the black colour of Bhairon, black buck,
black snakes and even black dogs are venerated. Nag Panchami is celebrated by the Naths. [2. pp. 132-35].
Animal and blood sacrifices at the temples of Bhairon and some tombs are a common feature. At
the annual fair at Devi Pattan, 20 buffaloes, 250 goats and 250 pigs were sacrificed on a single day. The fair
opens on the arrival of the Nath pr from Nepal, who presides over the function. The mark of the blood is
applied to the devotees. [2. pp. 94-96]. Kalaki Purana, which is a scripture of the sak/as, has a chapter on
human sacrifices. [2. p. 168]. The Gorakhnathis have some practices similar to this group. Naths serve as
pujaris at the Sak## temples. Gorakhnath is said to have substituted animal sacrifice for human sacrifice. [2. p.
141].
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
At Hinglaj, 4nga-yoni mark is put on the visiting yogis. [2. pp. 17, 172]. Visits to Nath monasteries and
Hindu sacred places are regarded as of distinct religious benefit. A visit to Hinglaj monastery is necessary to
make a person perfect. [2. p. 108].
The Naths accept and recognise Hindu beliefs in gods and goddesses, good and bad spirits,
auspicious and inauspicious days and many other superstitions. [2. p. 125].
(c) Yogie Practices : Saivism and yoga have an ancient bond or combination. Harappan seals show
Shiva in yogic pose. Both are a part of the Sramanic tradition. Das Gupta writes that yoga arose as the means
of deliverance of the hermits from the oppressive environment and the misery of the world. Its theory
envisages that, as in the case of Jainism and Sankhya, the combination of the material and spiritual elements is
a bondage, and release from the world has to be sought by breaking this combination. Another object is a
state of eternal quiet, isolation and bliss.
The basic yogic discipline is the one detailed by Patanjali in the period about 300 A.D. For yoga,
celibacy is essential. This discipline is eight-fold, involving yama, niyama, asana, pranayama, pratyabara, dharna,
dhyana and samadhi. \t includes use of the word Om, fasts, concentration, one-point meditation and stoppage
of mental processes, creating unconciousness. As from the ancient times, the general and primary aim of
yoga is to gain miraculous powers. The yogi is the master of three worlds and can control the evolution of
‘gunas of prakriti. [2. pp. 265-71]. Such powers are called siddhis. Yogis, who have attained those powers, are
called Siddhas. Naths are closely associated with Siddhas, whose principle aim is to gain power. For,
Gorakhnath is not only one of the nine Naths, but he is counted as one of the eighty four Siddhas. He is
supposed to be their teacher. [2. pp. 136-38].
Das Gupta enumerates four kinds of yoga : Raj Yoga, Mantra Yoga, Laya Yoga and Hath Yoga. Raj
Yoga deals with mind and its psychic powers and the intellectual processes. Mantra Yoga employs the
repitition of sacred texts, words and letters. This yoga almost enters the realm of magic. [2. pp. 272-73]. Laya
Yoga is quietist. It involves elimination of mental processes and of inducement of trances and
unconsciousness, leading to the final state, ending in permanent quiet of mind. The fourth is Hath Yoga or
Kundalani Yoga. The method is mainly physical and in practice it uses Pranayana. The aim is the same,
namely samadbi, isolation or union with Shiva. The practice of Kundalani Yoga also employs other yogas
including Mantra and Laya Yoga. In fact, the practice of any one of the yogas also involves the use of the
methods of the other yogas. The general methods used are the ones indicated by Patanjali. The difference is
only of emphasis. For, no kind of yoga is exclusive in its character. The Naths mainly stress upon Mantra
Yoga and Hath Yoga. [2. pp. 272-74].
The three most important religious texts of the Naths ate Goraksastaka, Goraksa — Paddhati and
Hath Yoga Pradipika. The first of them is the most revered work of Naths. It is attributed to Gorakhnath
himself. It suggests 84 postures and six stages of yoga and gives 100 verses by the knowledge of which the
highest state is attained. It prescribes asanas and gaze between the eyes and on the tip of the nose. There are
nine doors and those are presided by five deities. During the yogic practice, “nga and yoni are mentioned to
appeat, accompanied with great light. By seeing this light, death is overcome. [2. pp. 284-88, 3. p.132].
According to the discipline, the Nath must repeat 1008 names of God everyday. The yogi sees 72,000 nadis
below the navel. In Goraksastaka the Nadis, Ida, Pingala, Susumana, Gandbari, etc. and their courses are
indicated. [2. pp. 288-91]. The Prana is connected through Ida, Pingala and Susumana. The repitition of the
word hamsa is prescribed. By the repitition of the mantra 21,600 times a day, the yogi gains liberation in a
year’s time or so. By the practice of yoga, even poison can be digested. The secret of Mahanrudra practice
should not be told to anyone. He who knows Khefari Mudra is not troubled by death. The Bindu is of two
kinds, white (semen) and blood red (menstrual fluid). Bindu is Shiva and Rayas is Shakti. By uniting the two,
the highest state is achieved. Ow is the supreme light in which three worlds, three Vedas, three accents and
three gods are situated. In Om is three-fold knowledge, Shakti, etc. Ov is the light in the elements of which
the world, bhuh, bhavah, soah and the three divinities of sun, moon and fire exist. Om, the seed should be
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
repeated and uttered. Whether pure or impure, whoever repeats it is not affected by sin. Pranayama, while
meditating on the sun and moon, is recommended. In this text, the yogic system, involving Pranayama, six
citcles, three channels and kandalani and nada and bindu, is detailed. The ten chief Nadis are Ida, Pingala,
Susumana, Gandbari, Hastijihoa, Pusa, Yasasvani, Alambusa, Kubus and Samkhini. ‘These terminate in ten
openings. The first three vadis are the important ones in raising the Randalani. Susumana extends to the tenth
opening. It is the path of enjoyment and bliss in which male and female elements unite. Kwndalani is raised
through the six chakras. Indra, Brahma and Kai with four-hands, a staff, wine, skull and spear are involved in
kundalani symbolism. The final goal of Aundalani is to reach the top of the head at Sabasrara, the place of final
bliss and union with Shiva. There is Saya, the place of Ishvara, the abode of Brahma. The union of Rajas
and Bindu (Shiva and Shakti) is the aim of yoga. The thrills of the physical reaction in the process of yoga ate
called religious experiences. [2. pp. 293-322].
The aims of yoga are immobility of body and mental process, the ecstatic experiences of union of
Rajas (Aundalani) and Bindu (Shiva) at the various levels and the six chakras in the body, supernatural powers,
and final release and bliss. All these are secured by Asanas, Mudra, Bandba, Pranayama, retention of breath and
bindu, breath control, cleaning of adis and miscellaneous practices. The other physical yogic methods
adopted are Dhoti, Basti, Nett, Trataka, Mauti, Kapala Bhati, etc. By Pranayama, kundalani is directed to
Susumana. During the process, one hears internal sounds (Anahata nad) in a year’s time. Mental processes are
brought to a stand still. There are many varieties in the use of Mudra, Asana, Pranayama, etc. By this yoga, all
physical, psychic and mystic powers are gained and finally Shiva is enjoyed in eternal bliss. If in wrath, the
yogi can move the three worlds. The union of Bindu and Ragas in the throat yields supernatural power. It is
the gateway to final release. The Sabasrara is the true world, there one has the highest bliss. Mind is dissolved
and unconsciousness follows. It is the fountain-head of all creation where kundalani enjoys Paramatman and
bliss. This is the yoga prescribed in the Nath system. It involves all kinds of yogas, but the stress is on Hath
Yoga and Mantra Yoga. [2. pp. 326-33].
The question now is whether Hath Yoga is a later innovation, or it is basically a variety of the old and
otiginal yogic system. We find that Hath Yoga, in its fundamental form, including the system of Nadis and
kundalani, is very old. It was known to the Chandogya Upanishad which says that the soul departed through
the chakras gains immortality. [3. p. 130]. Not only is there a reference to Susmana Nadi, but the theory of
Nadi and its spiritual value is given also in the Maitri Upanishad. Tessitore writes : “The close alliance of
Kanphata system to the yoga both of Patanjali and of the Upanishads is visible from the prominent part given
to the yoga praxis as well as to the mystical theory, to the circles in the body (chakra, Rausala), arteries (nala),
vital ait (pavana) and breaths (hamsa).” [3. p. 130]. Similarly, Svetasvatara mentions the great gains of
Pranayama. All this only shows that the yoga variety practised by the Nath yogis is nothing new. The system,
in its essentials was known in the ancient and the Upanishadic times. There is nothing fundamentally Tantric
about it. In fact, the Tantric systems assume the basis of Hath, Mantra, and Raj Yogas. Even the non-
Tantric Vaishnava works detail the Hath Yoga. [3. p. 30-33]. After his survey, Ghurye also concludes that
Hath Yoga, in all its essentials, is an ancient or an Upanishadic system. [3. p. 132].
(d) The Combination Of Male And Female Forces : The fourth element of Nath fundamentals is the
emphasise on the union of male and female energies, Shiva and Shakti, so as to achieve liberation.
Both in the Hath Yoga Pradipika and Goraksa Paddhati which are Nath texts (the former is
attributed to Gorakhnath), it has been stated that the highest state can be attained both by asceticism and
restraint as well as by sex indulgence. Some of the methods prescribed for achieving eternal bliss or siddbi are
Vajrol, Sabjoli or Amroh. These sex practices, conducted in the company of a woman, lead both to moksha
and enjoyment. Madras and bandbas are similar to asanas in their efficacy. Great powers are obtained by such
like practices. Gheranda names 25 methods, including Vajroi, which confer magic and spiritual powers. By
Khetari Mudra, one gets ecstatic experiences beyond the range of senses; one becomes deathless and Karma
becomes inoperative. The mind and Prana are dissolved in Samadhi. In fact, Raj Yoga, Unmani, Manomani,
Asunga, Amaratva, Laya Tatvas, Paramapada, Idvaita, Sahaja, Niranjana, Miralamba, Jivan Mukti and Turiya
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
denote the same or the final state of being or achievement. [2. pp. 333-43]. It means bliss, isolation, union or
merger with Shiva or the Absolute. This is the final state in all yogas, including Kundalani yoga. [2. pp. 343-
47]. “By this yoga, Shiva appears as the vast ocean of bliss and knowledge, destroying the misery of the world,
and the end is the state of the unmoving flames of light in the inner soul, a body of bliss and knowledge.” [2.
pp. 347-48]. While éapas (hard discipline and austerity) have their place in the system, many of the practices
are concerned with sex functions and experiences. Drugs also induce ecstatic states and there are methods
for it. Both Ri Veda and Patanjali are aware of their use and utility. Patanjali says, “Perfections proceed
from both, or from drugs, or from spells, or from self-castigation or from concentration.” [2. p. 346]. There
are three classes of practitioners; Pasu, the one seeking self-control; Vira, the one who has gained self-control
and powers; and Divya, the one who has reached the final state. He is then free from all rules of virtue and
vice. He can do anything and indulge in anything he likes. [2. pp. 281-83].
About the system of Naths, Briggs concludes, “The essence of the Hath Yoga is physical exercise
and manipulations, quite mechanical. If it is charged against the exposition found in the preceding pages that
it is overburdened with interpretations on too low a plane, it must be said in reply that both the practice and
the outlook of the yogis confirm this point of view.”
“The historical background of the cult of Gorakhnath points in the same direction. The high
religious value to man-woman relations was insisted upon. The first Chatanaya Sahajya movement confirms
this point, as does Gorakhnath’s early affiliation with Vajarayana Buddhists.” “While Vaishnavite movement
emphasises love in the consort of the divine, the Satvite lays stress on her power of energy.” [2. pp. 349-50].
(¢) Antiquity Of Nathism : We are not inclined to agree with the view that this aspect of Nath Yoga
arose under Tantric influence and led to Nada-Bindu combination. Even Briggs concedes, while referring to
the times of Vedas, “that it is clear that from ancient times, drugs and sex stimulations were used for the same
ends of ecstasy and trance.” [2. pp. 216, 347]. The view of Tantric influence has arisen largely because of a
suggestion that, before being converted to Nathism by Matsyendra Nath, Gorakhnath was a Vajrayana
Buddhist. Apart from the fact that the suggestion is far from confirmed, this view displays quite an ignorance
of the history of yogic methods and Nathism. We have already seen that Ranphatas are a part of the Lakula
group of the Saivas of the Pasupata system of which Aghoria Kalamukhas and Kapalikas are a part. In fact,
Kapalikas are the nearest to Ramphatas, the essentials of the two cults being the same and similar. As such, this
development of the Naths has to be traced to the Pasupata and the earlier systems which are much older than
Tantric Buddhism.
Harappan seal and other sources testify celibacy of Shiva [3. pp. 13-15] and his asceticism is
vouchsafed. [3. p. 115]. Shiva-yoni worship is mentioned in the Atharva Veda. Burnett found a reference to
Sava Yogis or Vratyas occuring in the Atharva Veda. “He travels in a bullock cart, with a harlot, a musician,
two carriers, and two footmen, and professes Saiva magic with great fluency.” [3. p. 116]. Harier says that
these Vratyas, followers of Rudra Shiva and yoga, stand included in the Brahmanic system and are mentioned
in the Atharva Veda. These persons like yogis stand erect for a year and go over the country (like later yogis)
cursing and blessing the people. They are accompanied by a woman. The couple represent the male god and
female goddess, Shiva and Shakti. These wandering persons appeared in 800 B.C. before the birth of
Buddha. [2. pp. 212-13]. Bhandarkar draws pointed attention to the fact that Shiva, in the form of Lakulisa, is
portrayed with his organ erect. And it is in this form of Lakulisa that he is the tutelary deity of the Pasupatas.
Bhandarkar further connects this portrayal of Shiva with a similar seal-armlet discovered at Mohanjedaro. [3.
p. 13]. Thus, this sex symbolism and combination of male and female forces is both Vedic and pre-Vedic.
And, in all its erotic manifestations, is continued in the Kapalikas. This group is referred to in the works of
the Ist century A.D. Bhandarkar believes that the sect is mentioned in the Keno and Maiti Upanishads and is
older than them. In the old Soma sect, Shiva is represented as always with his consort Uma. The Kapalikas
are known for their methods of sense indulgence for spiritual advancement. [3. pp. 115-17].
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
In a dramatic skit of the 7th century A.D., Kapalika and Kapalini ridicule the systems of a Jain muni
and a Buddhist bhikhshu and extol their method of spiritual attainment through enjoyment of wine and
women. Ultimately, the Jain and the Buddhist are converted to the ways of the Kapalika. [3. pp. 118-19].
This shows that the Saiva systems hardly needed Buddhist influence for accepting erotic practices. It could
rather be the other way round. The parent Pasupata system of this group is the oldest Saiva system, being
mentioned in the Athaa Veda, Mahabharta and Atherasiras Upanishad. [3. p. 115]. Till recently, at the
Amarnath temple, Nath yogis danced naked, and women wore only a single garment. [2. p. 98].
Another important point is that Dattatreya is one of the chief deities worshipped by the Naths. He is
a Hindu deity, who is an avatara of Vishnu and is mentioned in more than one list of his incarnations. He was
a celibate with miraculous powers and gave self-realising knowledge to great persons like Alarka and Prahlada.
He is referred to in the Upanishads and is considered to be a Juani and a Paramahamsa. Dattatreya is the only
incarnation who has a cult following him and has temples devoted to his worship. All through, the Puranic
account “depicts him as always in ecstasy, surrounded by women, drinking wine and indulging in sex.” In
one Puranic account, “he demands flesh and wine in a human skull.” And he is one of the chief deities
whom Nath yogis worship. [3. pp. 34-5].
The Hindu works also recognise that the highest achievement can also be made through wine and
women. Hindu Tantra is supposed to be the 5th Veda of Kalyuga. [2. pp. 275, 280-8]. Infact, Tantric
systems themselves depend on Raj, Mantra and Hath Yogas, which are older systems. The Mantra Yoga as is
known, is closely allied to the Vedic theory [3. p. 21] that words, verses, letters and symbols have mysterious
powers, and that man and the world are subject to their influence.
Ghurye has collected a mass of evidence to dispel the suggestion of Tantric influence on the Nath
Panthis. He writes, “As Tantric literature is fairly recent, it may be supposed by our readers that the yogi
order is of recent origin. This impression must now be countered.” “Fundamentally, the yogis represent the
oldest school of Indian asceticism.” [3. p. 115]. “The yogis are the residue of the ancient Saivite Sects.” [2.
p. 218].
Zimmer also, in his broad survey of Tantric systems, concludes, “and in the deep philosophy of the
Tantric, we have again signs of the resurgence of the religiosity of the non-Aryan, matriarchal tradition of
Dravidian times.” [4. p. 569].
Another significant fact which clearly shows the link of Gorakhnathis with the ancient Pasupata or
Saiva system is the wild and abhorrent nature of the two sects. The author of the Dabistan writes that
Gorakhnathis use filtered excreta. He himself saw a Gorakhnathi eating the rotten flesh of a corpse. This
practice is deemed meritorious. [2. p. 227].
Two other factors also show the lack of the Nath connection with Tantric Buddhism and its
antiquity as a system. It is admitted that Gorakhnath introduced some moderation in the Naths, both in
regard to blood sacrifices and sex practices, compared to the extremes of the older Saiva sects like the
Kapalikas and Kalamukhas (though Aghorpanthis, also followers of Gorakhnath, are very extreme in their
practices). Had he really the Vajarayana background, which according to Briggs is one of the most degraded
religious groups, the Naths would have been more licentious and erotic in their practices than the Kapalikas.
This they are not. Hence, the improbability of Gorakhnath’s being originally a Vajarayana.
Secondly, old religious systems like Hinduism, in order to maintain a semblance of continuity,
developed a number of internal contradictions. Because, while attempt is made to accept and absorb new
developments, the older beliefs are not shed. This feature of contradictory practices is typically present
among the Naths. Gorakhnathis, while they take a vow of ahimsa, also indulge in blood sacrifices at their
monasteries. Many of the Naths eat meat except pork and beef. On the one hand, there is a vow of
asceticism and all concern with the world is given up by rejecting all business and employment, on the other,
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
the chief aim is to gain power over the forces of the body, nature and the world. While the Nath takes a vow
of celibacy, sex-symbolism, erotic practices and licensed indulgence ate recognised as the path of spiritual
achievement. And the person who has reached the spiritual height is above virtue and vice, being free to
indulge in anything forbidden to the seeker. Such strong contrasts in Nath beliefs and practices clearly
indicate an old tradition that has developed over a long period of time. It is not a new cult with a unified
system of doctrines and disciplines.
There is, thus, overwhelming evidence to conclude the direct lineage of the Nath cult from the oldest
pre-Vedic and Vedic traditions through the Saiva system of Pasupata and Kapalikas, with both of which all its
essentials are common. All the world over, ascetic or monastic systems, whether Hindu, Saiva, Vaishnava or
Buddhist, at one point or the other, lead to male and female symbolism and consequent erotic practices,
ultimately recognising sensual indulgence as a means to salvation. We should also like to emphasise that
where creative energies are not yoked to life-affirming, constructive and virtuous deeds, sects insisting on
celibacy or adopting sex symbolism almost always degenerate into accepting erotic, licentious or abhorrent
practices. This has happened both inside and outside India. On this issue, we agree with Briggs that whereas
female divinities have arisen all over and in all ages, no where in the world has male and female symbolism
been able for long to keep itself on a high plane. [2. pp. 350-51].
6. SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY AND THE WORLDVIEW OF THE NATH YOGI
The yogi, whether liberated or otherwise, has no social responsibility. By his very basic vows, he cuts
himself off from the world. The liberated person is either above virtue and sin, or stops all physical and
psychical processes entering a state of mindless unconsciousness. His mystic union involves eternal bliss and
rest. The question of any consequent activity does not arise. He has no social responsibility towards his
fellow beings. [2. pp. 351-52]. The yogi is under a vow that he will not earn his living and will instead beg for
his food — that being a part of his routine at the monastery. For his meditation, he is enjoined to select a
place which is not socially disturbed and where alms are freely available. [2. pp. 2-3, 326]. Evidently, this
worldview is categorically life-denying and negative. It is wholly opposed to the worldview of life-affirmation.
The world is a place of misery, release from it can be sought by completely dissolving all physical and
psychical processes of life. Applying the test of the unity of perception, ideology and activity, the entire
system and life of the yogi unmistakenly point towards a worldview of withdrawal from life. While the Nath
yogi expects the social system to provide him with abundant alms and an undisturbed solitude and socio-
political environment and security, he, on his part, feels altogether no responsibility towards the society on
which he depends. In short, in its approach to the world, its ethic, methodology, discipline and its goals, it is
typically a worldview of what Schweitzer calls life-negation. According to the classification adopted by us,
Nathism is a mysticism of rest, merger, or inactivity.
SIKHISM AND NATHISM : A COMPARISON
We find that the answers of Nathism and Sikhism to the twelve issues indicated by us are mostly
opposed in their implications. Sikhism is monotheistic, Nathism being a Saiva cult, also claims to be such,
but leans more towards, pantheism. In both cases the world is taken to be real. But, here ends the apparent
similarity. As we probe further, sharp divergences appear. The two systems have entirely different
methodologies, goals and worldviews. In Nathism, the world is a misery, and liberation from it has to be
sought by vows of celibacy, ahimsa, and non-patticipation in the affairs of man. The Nath cuts himself off
from the world as far as he can, because his goal is liberation from it. Once liberated, the superman merges
in Shiva in peace and bliss. The discipline to reach the goal is all formal, ritualistic and yogic.
The Sikh Gurus, goal is very different. They say, “by despising the world one gets not to God.”
They consider the world “a dharamsal — a beautiful place for all spiritual endeavours.” As such, participation
in the activities of man becomes essential. The responsibilities of the householder’s life are freely accepted.
God being the Ocean of Virtues, He shows His deep interest in the world and man. Therefore, in Sikhism,
the superman has to be the instrument of God in alleviating man’s sufferings and solving his problems.
God’s Will is attributive and man’s goal is always to carry it out. The Sikh prayer is not for liberation from
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
the world but for being given millions of hands to serve Him. For God showers His Grace where the weak
are helped. As to the spiritual discipline, there is only one method, the way of good deeds and deeds alone.
The Gurus do not believe in abimsa nor do they preclude the use of force when quite utterly necessary. By
applying the test of the unity of perception, ideology and activities, this is the only inference we could draw
from the lives of the Gurus.
Accordingly, we conclude that the two systems hold diametrically opposite views.
Not only is the contrast between the two systems glaringly evident, but every student of Guru
Granth Sahib knows that Nathism is one of the few systems, in which the approach, the methodology, the
formalism and the goal have been strongly criticised by the Gurus. There are numerous hymns in which the
ways and the ideals of the Naths have been denounced and the right ways and approach indicated. For
example, in the following hymns, the Gurus reject the practices of the Naths and instead recommend that
virtues should be cultivated and practised.
“Instead of wearing mudras and necklace of beads, carrying a beggar’s bowl and staff and scrubbing
ashes on the body, one should cultivate contentment and self-respect, strive and always keep God in mind.”
[1. p. 939]. “One has to control one’s mind, keep away from vices, treat all beings as of one class and salute
Him alone.” [1. Japuji]. Again, “The spiritual path (yoga) does not lie in wearing mudras in ears and necklace
of beads, nor does it lie in keeping a staff and a horn, nor in rubbing ashes on the body and making a close
shave of head. Real yoga (spiritual way) is to remain tranquil and balanced amidst the distracting turmoils of
the world.” [1. p. 730]. “The spiritual path can be trodden not by mere words and talk, but by actually
treating all men alike and as one’s equals. Yoga does not lie in living in cremation grounds, doing one-point
meditation or in roaming all over the land or visiting places of pilgrimage, but in remaining balanced and
God-centred while conducting the affairs of the world.” [1. p. 730].
The yogic methods have also been clearly rejected, including Neo and other yogic exercises. The
only worthwhile thing is the love of God and man, and to keep Him in one’s mind. The rubbing of ashes on
the body and other rituals have no meaning unless vice and egoism are given up and the heart is in tune with
Him. The Gurus lay down that “no worship of God is possible without the practice of virtues.” [1. p. 4].
“Good, righteousness, virtues and giving up of vice are the ways to realize the essence of God.” [1. p. 418].
In the Guru’s system, “he who earns his living through honest means and shares the fruit of his
labour with others, knows the (Godly) way.” [1. p. 1245]. Parasitism in every form is deemed most
despicable. The Guru deprecates “the yogi who gives up the world and then is not ashamed of begging from
door to door.” [1. p. 886].
In the Nath system celibacy is essential. Woman, as in many other Hindu systems, is deemed to be a
temptress, because the Naths would not sit and eat with even Nath women. But in the Guru’s system,
downgrading the woman has been denounced and she is deemed to be an equal partner in man’s spiritual
venture. When the Third Guru created districts of religious administration, women too were selected to head
them. All this was wholly contrary to the entire Indian tradition in which women had been given only a
secondary place and generally considered to be an impediment in the spiritual path. In all ascetic and
monastic systems, woman has been dubbed as evil to be shunned. That is so even in systems that renounce
the world either on account of bhakt# or devotion or for other reasons. But in the Guru’s system, her role is
significant and equal to that of man.
The Gurus emphatically reject the otherworldly approach of the Naths. They deprecate renunciation
of the world as well as one who does not earn his living. In all the hymns of the Gurus, the emphasise is on
the shedding of vice and on virtuous living. “Love, contentment, truth, humility and other virtues enable the
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
seed of Naam (God) to sprout.” [1. p. 955]. “With self-control and discipline, we forsake vice and see the
miracle of man becoming God.” [1. p. 343].
A confusion has arisen in the minds of some students of religions, because the Gurus have used
some words in their hymns which have also been employed by the authors of other religious books, but with
a different meaning and import. For example, the Gurus say that at the final stage of spiritual achievement,
one gets the bliss of Ahad Sabad or unstruck music. But this Ahad Sabad, as the Gurus call it, has nothing
to do with the “Anhad Sabad’, as used by the Nath Yogis. In the Nath Yoga “Anhad Sabad’ is a sound which
the Yogi hears when the Aundalani is raised through the madis and the chakras in the body. This is a process
which occurs at a far lower stage than the final one of bliss when the union of kwndalani takes place with
Shiva at the Sabassare in the top of the head. As such, the “Anbad Sabad’ of the Naths, as Dr Jodh Singh has
also stated, has nothing to do with the Abad Sabad of the Gurus, which indicates the bliss one attains at the
time of the final spiritual achievement. [6. pp. 214-220]. In fact, the Gurus have described this ultimate state
also with many different terms like Nirbana, Turya, Mukti, etc. But these words have quite different import
and meanings in the other religious systems, where too, these terms have been used. A close study of Guru
Granth Sahib makes clear the real content and meaning of these terms. These are the Gurus own, and are
quite variant from the way other systems use them. For example, Buddhist wirvana is entirely different from
what the Gurus conceive and convey by this term. They only mean union with Naam. Sometimes, the
Gurus’ use of these terms is only metaphoric. Therefore, the use of some words, also employed by the Nath
yogis, does not mean that the Gurus accept the Nath yoga approach. In fact, the Gurus definitely denounce
it. Though McLeod has been misled by such terms, yet even he concedes that Guru Granth Sahib does not
mention the system of Ida, Susumana and Pingla, which is fundamental to the Nath Yoga methodololgy. Guru
Granth Sahib clearly records Bhagat Namdev saying, “I shall sing and imbibe the name of God and achieve
the highest stage, I reject the methods of Ida, Pingla and Susumana and of the union of the sun and the moon
(as in Nath Yoga, the sun representing Shiva and the moon, the Avndalani). 1 shall reach Him otherwise.” [1.
pp. 972-3].
There is one more point of contrast. In Nathism, the method of sense indulgence is accepted as an
alternative discipline for spiritual attainments. In Guru Granth Sahib there is not the faintest suggestion of
this kind. Rather Nath celibacy and its ill effects are denounced. “He carries a beggat’s bowl by giving up the
world and women. But overpowered by passion he is infatuated by women of others.”
In short, Nathism and Sikhism present opposite worldviews. It is the compulsions and implications
of each worldview that lead the two systems to give opposing answers practically to all of the various issues
raised by us. The fundamental difference is that Nathism rejects the world and life as misery, whereas
Sikhism accepts them as spiritually meaningful. Therefore, in Nathism withdrawal from the world,
asceticism, celibacy, the downgrading of women, solitude, yogic methodology, etc., become naturally
essential. Similarly, in Sikhism, God being Attributive, virtuous participation in the world, accepting a
householder’s life and responsibilities, the consequent raising of the status of women, and the love and
service of man in all spheres of his life become logically necessary. Because, here the key test of spiritual
growth and stature is in the deeds of a person and whether or not the person earns his living through his own
honest endeavour, shares his income with others, and treats everyone as his equal. In one case, the goal is
merger or union with Shiva, involving eternal peace and bliss without any role for the superman. In the
other, the goal is always to carry out the Attributive Will of God and a continuous virtuous endeavour to
solve the problems of man. There is hardly a meeting ground between the two systems.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
REFERENCES
. Guru Granth Sahib.
GS. Briggs : Gorakhnath and Kanphata Y ogies.
G.S. Ghutrye : Indian Sadhus.
H. Zimmer : Philosophies of India.
R.G. Bhandarkar : Vatsnavism and Saivism.
. Jodh Singh : Gurmat Nirnain.
ONS ee Ian
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
15
VAISNAVISM
DALJEET SINGH
Vaisnavism is far from being a unified or an integrated religious system. The reason for it is that it
has not grown from the religious experience or the inspiration of a single personality or prophet. It is a
grouping together of cults and creeds that are at times mutually quite at variance in their doctrines and
essentials. Even the name Vaisnavism was given to this group only during the later period of its growth
extending over two thousand years. In order to understand Vaisnavism and its various modes of worship of
the Lord, we shall first have briefly to trace its long and chequered history.
The ancient systems of India were either dualistic, involving a multiplicity of pwrushas without the
concept of God in the theistic sense, or were ritualistic (Vedic), without the concept of a Commander issuing
the Vedic commands. In the Upanishadic system, Brahman was conceived primarily in the monistic or in the
pantheistic sense. In this system, there was naturally no place for devotion or a system of love as
contemplated in a theism. For, in the Vedic system, everything including heaven could be obtained by the
performance of rituals and sacrifices. In this context, the growth of a system of worship and devotion could
appear only by the inflow of a side-stream and not as indigenous to the Vedic or the other orthodox systems.
Having been accepted in the Brahminical fold originally, only as an alternative method of moksha, it later grew
into an independent religious system, with doctrines and a philosophy of its own. This happened mainly in
the post-Sankara period, especially when the Alwar saints in the south and other Vaisnava saints came up in
the north, the east, and the west of India. Let us see, how the content and the thought of the Vaisnava
system developed and crystallised during its long history which may be divided into three phases; the first of
the pre-Gita period, and the second of the period between the Gita and the emergence of the Alwar saints.
In the third phase, bhakti was deemed to be the major, if not the sole, means of salvation. This is mostly in
the post-Sankara period.
THE FIRST PHASE
(a) It is now commonly believed that originally four streams of thought mingled to form the early
Vaisnava system of the pre-Christian era when it was incorporated in the Gita. Probably, the oldest of them
was the worship of Vasudeva, who was the god of a tribe called Wrsmi or Satvatas. One of the earliest
references to it is in a Buddhist text, where the worship of Vasudeva is mentioned alongwith over half a
dozen other minor systems of worship, including the worship of a cow, a horse, an elephant, a crow, etc.!
Vasudeva was a historical figure. The system of his worship with other accretions was called the Bhagavata
system. This cult, which later involved the worship of Vasudeva-Krishna, had many non-Aryan and non-
Vedic elements.?
(b) The second stream of thought was connected with the name of Narayana, who had been
mentioned as a god in the Vedic times. Nara, Narayana, Hari, sons of Dharma, are referred to as forms of
the Supreme. But, apart from reference to them as gods and the ritualistic use of the related hymns, there
was no system of their separate worship. For, in the Vedic period ritualism was supreme. It is later that the
worship of Narayana began. Narayana was originally a tribal god.> Later still arose the worship of Hari as a
side or subsidiary growth. In course of time, both these streams, of the worship of Vasudeva and of
Narayana and Hari, appear to have joined each other, though their complete mingling had not taken place
even up to the time of the Bhagavad Gita.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
(c) The third stream of thought arose from the Upanishads themselves. The Upanishads and the
Bhagavad Gita are believed to be mere compilations of variant and unreconciled religious thoughts.* In the
Chandogya Upanishad occurs the name of Krishna, which name was later associated with Vasudeva as
Krishna-Vasudeva. In the Upanishads, especially the later Upanishads, the idea of a Controller of the
universe had appeared. But, it is there entirely in the context of the monistic or pantheistic Brahman, the
Vedic ritualism, and the caste. In fact, the caste divisions had not only been accepted by the Upanishadic
thought as a part of their overall ideology, but the system had been well formed in the Upanishadic period.
(d) Though Vishnu was also a Vedic deity, the theory of his incarnation had not been advanced in
the Vedic times. All the same, his worship constituted the fourth stream that formed the system of
Vaisnavism.
These four streams contributed to the thought of the Bhagavad Gita, which, being an eclectic
compilation, also drew heavily on the religious systems of Sankhya, yoga, Vedic Ritualism, and the
Upanishads.
Originally, the worship of Narayana, Vasudeva and Visnu became associated with the religion of
ritualistic sacrifices. ‘This is probably the price these cults had had to pay for being accepted in the
Brahminical fold. Till the time of the Gita, neither the complete identification of Vasudeva and Narayana had
taken place, nor had his being the incarnation of Visnu been accepted. Thus, Pancaratra or Bhagavatism, we
find, is the original and the chief source of Vaisnavism. The Gita had no organic connection with this earlier
system which had been there since almost the fifth century B.C.
In the beginning, bhakti meant only favour, fondness or kinship. Gods had bhakti for men, just as
men had bhakti for gods. Bhakti meant merely a form of adoration.’ The view, has also been expressed that
the theistic worship of Natayana, and later even the theory of the incarnations of Visnu, arose under the
influence of Buddhism. Because, it was the Mahayana that introduced the doctrine of Boddhisattva and the
idea of an Ambitabha and a Buddha who took birth in order to save mankind. As a consequence, also
appeared the idea of devotion towards such a compassionate saviour of mankind.°
THE SECOND PHASE
It is practically a settled view that the Gita is of composite origin.’ Admittedly, it suggests different
doctrines. The path of Jzana or knowledge, the path of ritualism or Karman and the path of modified Sankhya
are recommended as different means for the achievement of the goal. In addition, the path of worship is
suggested as an alternative method of moksha. It is not the type of worship or emotional bhakti which we find
in the Bhagavata Purana, or as described and defined by Sandilya more than ten centuries later. The worship
prescribed in the Gita is a mere form of adoration.
Let us first consider the place of theistic thought in the Bhagavad Gita. For this purpose we shall
state briefly the contents of the Gita and the systems it suggests. The path of knowledge is from the Sankhya
and of Karma (Yajnas) from the Rig Veda. In the Sankhya, all desires and actions are the activities of Prakriti.
Hence the way to liberation is a realisation by the ‘Purus@ that no activity is his. To dissociate oneself from
that activity, is the aim of life. The so-called method of unattached action, a ‘psychological impossibility’,® is,
thus, simply another way of expressing the same idea of disentanglement of Pwrusa from Prakriti. Man should
not, be attached to actions in the world. He should, instead, withdraw himself (the Pwrusa) from all activities,
which are only the phases and forms of prakniti with which Purusa should remain unconcerned. In addition,
Gita gives religious sanction to the path of worship or bhakti. In the Mahabharata the prominent gods are
Shiva and Visnu. It is stated in Chapter IV that ‘those who know the incarnations and the celestial deeds of
Bhagavata are released from the body and are not born again’; that ‘Yajna of knowledge is the best .”. The
system of rituals and sacrifices is also fully rationalised and recognised. Sankhya and Yoga are linked with
Sanyasa and Karam yoga ot meditational ritualism. By following either, one gets the fruits of both. It suggests
that all worship and austerities should be devoted to God. By yoga practices one gets tranquility in
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Bhagavata. The devotees of Lord are of four kinds. Of these, the Jmani is the best. He who dies while
remembering Lord Krishna attains to this condition. By yoga practices, concentration and meditation, and by
uttering Om and remembering Krishna, one gets Moksa. There is no return from that stage. Those who die
while the sun is in the northern course go to Brahman. Those who die while the sun is in the southern
course, go to the moon from which the soul returns. Through yoga practices one reaches A&sara (Brahman),
the highest goal. By meditation on the syllable Om, the soul hits the target of Brahman. The system is made
theistic by Brahman being called Bhagavata. Those who perform sacrifices and rituals, attain heaven thereby.
The value of rituals is, thus, recognised. One who adores Krishna single-mindedly, becomes holy even if one
were wicked earlier. The Vaisyas, the Sudras and women can worship Bhagavata. Those who meditate on
Bhagavata reach him quickly. Those who meditate on Brahman reach there but with difficulty. If one cannot
meditate and concentrate on Bhagavata, nor can remember him, one should do disinterested deeds. But, to
this method the third place is given in the order of preference as a mode of salvation.
Modern research discloses that this concession to women and Sudras for admission to the path of
bhakti was given as a result of Buddhist influence, because Buddhist monasteries had been opened to Sudras,
Vaisyas and women without any distinction.’ It is also believed that this opening of the path of bhakii to
women and Sudras was far from being a new thing or a concession. In the local or non-Aryan tribes, there
was no teligious prejudice against women or others. Therefore, for Brahminism, the acceptance of the status
quo became necessary for bringing these tribes under its authority. This is also suggested by the fact that, as
time passed, the religious prejudice against women and Sudras instead of wearing out became hardened. For,
both Ramanuja and Sankaradeva (a very liberal saint), would not initiate women to the Vaisnava path.!° The
former virtually confirmed the religious distinction between Sudras and others by opening only Prapatti to the
low castes and closing the path of bhaki#i to them.
The metaphysical position in the Gita is somewhat puzzling, as both pantheistic and dualistic views
are indicated. As also stated in some of the Upanishads, God divides himself and forms the various beings of
the world. In this sense, souls are considered identical with God. At the same time, the dualism of Sankhya
and co-eternal prakriti ate recognized. The goal is an eternal life of bliss. All changes, qualities and actions
belong to prakriti, which is the cause of all of them, while Purusa, who is inactive, suffers. In this body is
“Purusa’, the Supreme Soul. By meditation one can see it and withdraw Purusa. The final stage can be attained
both by Sankhya-yoga, and by Karam-yoga. Others can do so by meditation. The Sankhya system and all the
details of the working of prakri# are fully accepted. But the mention of the atheism of Sankhya is avoided. It
is also accepted by implication that since Pwrusa does not take part in the activities of prakritz, man is
absolved of all moral responsibility. Hence the emphasis is on concentration, meditation, mechanical
remembering, withdrawal, ritualism and knowledge, but not on ethical conduct as the foremost path to
salvation.
The diet taken and the modes of worship, sacrifices and austerities practised by one differ according
to one’s faith and nature, which are of three kinds, featured by goodness, activity and knowlege. This would
seem to suggest differences of even diet among higher and lower castes. It is laid down that the duties of a
man vary according to his caste. In the Gita there is a major emphasis on confirming and consolidating the
caste system. Not only has it been stated that the Lord made the four castes but it has twice been stressed
that the doing of the caste duties of another caste, howsoever well done, or well meant, is not as good as the
doing of one’s own caste duties, even though without quality and worth. “Of Brahmanas, Kshattrtyas,
Vaishyas and Shudras, O Parantapa, the duties have been distributed according to qualities born of their own
natures.” “Ploughing, protection of kine, and trade are the Vaishya duty, born of his own nature. Action of
the nature of service is the Shudra duty born of his own nature.” “Better is one’s own duty though destitute
of merits than the well-executed duty of another. He who doeth the duty laid down by his own nature
incurreth not sin.” “Congenital duty, O son of Kunti, though defective, ought not to be abandoned.”!
On the side of all phenomenal change, the Sankhya system and its twenty-four principles of change
are accepted; so are yoga principles and its meditation. It is the contemplative union with God that we find in
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
the Gita, and the transition to it from the state of yoga concentration is not difficult to understand. The
earlier literature does not emphasize the emotional element in devotion. The kind of emotional bhaki ot
love, which appeared in the post Sankara-Ramanuja period, is simply not there. In the times of the Gita, and
those of Ramanuja, all that is meant by bhak# or devotion is ‘upasana’, or meditation and concentration on
God. The ideas of the worship and the grace of God are there. But the same were present, though in a faint
form, even in the Upanishads like the Brhadaranayaka, the Katha and the Mundaka.
It is necessary here to indicate the mode of worship of the Bhagavata system which became, in
conjunction with streams from the other schools of thought, the chief base of the worship of the deity.
Pancaratra Samhita is the book on which is based the method of worship. The system is somewhat ritualistic
and prescribes mantras variously arranged. Many frites are also indicated in the Swtvata-Samhita.
Shankaracharya details the following methods of worship : (1) Going to the temple with mind fixed on the
deity, (2) collecting materials for worship, (3) actual worship, (4) the muttering of mantras, and (5) yoga or
meditation. By worship in this manner for a hundred years all sins are destroyed. As to the method of
worship of Hari, there are six steps : (1) Remembering Him, (2) the uttering of His Name, (3) salutation, (4)
resorting to His feet, (5) constant worship with devotion, and (6) the surrender of the soul.!?
It is significant that all, modes of worship are devotional, ritualistic and formal without any reference
to social and moral conduct. In fact, in the Bhagavata system, bhakt or worship was done in order to gain
religious merit rather than as an expression of love for the deity.
It is clear that the Bhagavad Gita gave few new religious ideas. In fact, it records all kinds of
divergent systems within one compilation. The overall system and approach remains, by and large, orthodox
and traditional. The duality and co-eternal character of Purusa and prakriti are accepted, as also the priority of
the system of meditation, yoga and concentration. It is clearly mentioned that the Lord came to fulfil the law
and not to supplant it. The rigidity and the immobility of the caste system are confirmed, sanctified and
stressed, in so far as one must do one’s own caste duties and not those of other castes.
Purther, the sacrificial system is also regarded as a valid path. What is suggested is the worship of
Bhagavata. This system had existed already. Except for the purposes of worship, the status of Sudras and
women, put in the same class, is kept where it was in the Brahminical system. The worship recommended is
also of a formal nature in the sense that even remembrance at the time of death absolves one of all sins and
ensures salvation.
Ramanuja defines devotion (bhaki) as “un-broken contemplation of God. It is this contemplative
union with God that we find in the Gita. In fact, the word bhaki, as in the system of the Upanishads or of
Ramanuja, only means mere meditation (Upasana) and not the loving devotion or love, Self-surrender in the
Gita does not mean an ideal of love or of personal relationship. It is the ideal of contentment, non-
attachment and self-control. It is the idea of the old yoga of Patanjali, where also this discipline of self-
surrender has been suggested.
It is, therefore, important to understand that the system of love, as in the case of Mahayana or of
Sufism or of the bhakti saints like Kabir, Namdev and others, is simply not there in the Gita, either as an idea
or as a basis for future development. It is much later in the Bhagavata Purana that the different forms of
emotional bhakti are mentioned. In fact, the bhakii system of love or mystic intuition through love did not
exist before Sandilya. The Gita tended only to consolidate and bring in one compilation variant systems like
the worship of Bhagavata, the ritualism and caste duties of the Vedic religion, the dualism of Sankhya-Yoga
and its mode of isolation of Purusa from the activities of the prakriti, the meditation of yoga, and the monism
and pantheism of the Upanishads. Das Gupta also refers to the syncretic character of the Gita where he says
that it is a compromise “between the worldly life of allotted duties and the hermit’s life of absolute
renouncement.” “On the one hand we purify our minds by non-attachment, and yet, on the other hand, we
continue to perform all the ritualistic and other duties belonging to our particular caste or stage of life, i.e. the
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
prescribed stages of four ashrams.”'+ The Gita laid down different paths of moksha. But, the systems had
existed already. While it gave priority to the path of Juana and the meditational processes of yoga, and
accepted the ritualistic mysticism of the Vedas, it also approved of the formal and meditational devotion of
the Bhagavata system.
In the Gita the ideal, by the very nature of things, was merger or salvation from the empirical world
with the object of never returning to it. In life all one had to do was to perform one’s caste duties that had
been assigned under the Vedic and orthodox scriptures. Their authority was fully recognised as also of the
overall social structure these prescribed.
In the course of time, the four streams of Vasudeva, Visnu, Narayana and the Upanishad idea of a
Supreme Soul combined to form one religion. To this was added the fifth stream of Gopala Krishna from
the Ahir race.
THE THEORY OF INCARNATION
This theory is a basic fundamental of Vaisnavism. It portrays faithfully both the genesis and the
growth of Vaisnavism as well as the variety of its trends and thoughts. It also explains the evident conflict in
some of its principles and theology, and the main thrust and objectives of the system. Simultaneously, with
the consolidation of Vaisnavism as a separate system, the theory of incarnation of Visnu came to be formed.
The idea, believed to have arisen under Buddhist influence, is that God takes the human form in order to
save man. This theory gave an impetus to the attempt at the integration of various religious systems and
modes of worship, even though very divergent in their historical origin, creeds, or aims. The only thing
common among them was the general acceptance of the Vedic scriptures and status guo in the social order.
Slowly Visnu rose from a minor to a major god. This cult served a triple purpose. On the one hand it gave
recognition to the non-Aryan or local gods and included them in the Hindu pantheon. On the other hand, it
brought within the Brahminical fold many of the local and foreign tribes,!5 and thirdly this enabled the
Brahminical priests to impose on these new entrants not only their authority and caste ideology, but also their
ritual and religious practices. All avtars are supposed to be the different forms of Visnu. The theory has
become a noteworthy feature of Hinduism. It enables it to absorb other creeds by declaring their gods or
prophets as the manifestations of the Supreme God or Visnu. In the Gita, Lord Krishna says that those who
worship other gods also worship him, though imperfectly. The number of av/ars of Visnu rose from time to
time, including the boar, the man-lion, the dwarf, Rama, swan, tortoise, and Vasudeva-Krishna. In the
Bhagvata Purana this number rose to twenty three. The mythical Kapila, the author of the dualistic Sankhya
system without a god, is included as an av/ar, as also the Rsabha, the first Trithankra of the Jains who do not
believe in God. By the eighth century A.D., Buddha was also accepted in the list of avsars. It appears that, in
Vaisnavism, the integrity of the theistic doctrine was hardly the concern of any one. Similarly, in the
apparently synthetic attempt of the Bhagavad Gita, the elements of the dualistic systems like the Sankhya and
yoga were included both for meditational purposes and for explaining changes in life as the activity of co-
eternal prakrit, Among the av/ars, authors of the non-theistic systems of Buddhism, Jainism and Sankhya were
also included. Evidently, to the authors of Vaisnavism, the only concern was to accept and to show Visnu as
the Supreme God. They were unconcerned with the unity or purity of its doctrine and theology, or of the
modes of worship and the prescribed religious practices. In fact, heterogenous doctrines and authors of
heterodox, non-theistic and dualistic systems were owned. It is, therefore, important to understand that, as
against the equality and brotherhood of man and the fatherhood of God, almost inherent in any monotheistic
system, the grading of the caste system and the social and religious segregation of the Sudras were kept
intact, duly sanctioned and approved. One thing is significant. In the Buddhist theory of incarnation,
Buddha has been taking birth even in the house of lower castes in order to save mankind. But, there is no
avtar of Visnu who took birth in the house of a low caste.!° This would suggest that, while in the metaphysical
ot the theological stands, there could be considerable variation, relaxation or diversity, there could be no
compromise on the social ideology of caste. In addition, Vedic ritualism and the authority of the Vedas and
the Brahmin priests were accepted by the new entrants. All this was maintained not only in the earlier
Vaisnava systems, but also in the Vishist Advaita of Ramanuja and the later Vaisnavism.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Lord Rama was taken to be an avfar porobably in the early centuries of the Christian era, though
there was then no separate cult in his name. It was later, near the 11th Century A.D. that the cult of Lord
Rama actually came into existence. Here, too, there are manuals giving the mode of worship of the deity, by
means of mantras, formulae and magic circles, quite like those prescribed in the Satvata-Samhita for the
worship of Vasudeva.!”
THE THIRD PHASE
Next we come to the period of Sandilya and Bhagavata Purana in the 11th century A.D. The bhakut
these two describe is not the worship of or meditation on God as in the Gita. Nor does it involve formal
singing. It is a deep affection for God. According to Vallabha, God invokes love in man. It is a favour
bestowed by Him (gust). In the emotional type of bhakti, the devotee feels a sense of spiritual intoxication
and joy. Like Chaitanya, the devotee ‘sings, laughs, dances and weeps.’ He is no longer a person of the
world.
It is in the Bhagavata Purana that we first find the idea of devotion as the supreme source of bliss.
Bhakti becomes by itself the goal. It substitutes the place of wisdom or philosophical knowledge. Such bhakit
is believed to destroy all the past sins of man. Thus, bhak# becomes a mantra or a type of magic. But, in all
this, no moral action is stressed. The bhak# of Bhagavata Purana is not the old contemplative meditation of
God. It is the upsurge of feelings and emotions of love for God. The Bhagavata Purana mentions nine
modes of worship. Each of these can lead to moksha.'® These include listening to the praise of God, the
reading of sacred books, the repeating of God’s Name, remembering Him, etc. The repeating of God’s
Name can bring deliverance. All these modes are ritualistic and magical. The important thing is that no
motal activity is prescribed or emphasised. Idol worship is accepted. The Bhagavata Purana is aware of the
three methods of salvation, namely, that of knowledge, of work, and of devotion. It not only accepts their
validity, but also the Vedic scriptures and the prescribed social system. The point of importance is that the
goal of life and the role of the jwanmukta remains otherworldly.
Sandilya’s definition of bhakti not only prescribes it as the only mode of worship, but also
distinguishes it from the types of worship prevalent earlier to this period, including bhaki as indicated in the
Gita. These old modes of worship, like the offerings of flowers (as mentioned in the Gita), indicate only
shraddha, ot faith. This new bhakti is a loving affection. It is neither knowledge nor action. Sandilya and his
commentator, Svapnesvara, attack the Vedanta doctrine that liberation or salvation arises from knowledge of
the soul. This bhakti has been described as follows. “The true method is ‘bhakti’, or devotional faith,
directed to the Lord. This is the immediate cause of salvation. Knowledge is an auxiliary to bhakiz, and may
become useful by washing away the filth of unbelief. But it will not by itself abolish the veil which exists
between the soul and the Supreme.” “In the highest form, it (bhak/) is affection fixed upon the Lord.
Affection is its essence.”
“Bhakti is not an action (a ‘work’). It does not depend, as knowledge does, upon an effort of the
will. Hence, as it is not an action, its fruit (beatitude) is endless. Every action, on the other hand, ultimately
perishes.” “The means are knowledge, concentration, etc. The end is bhakiv.”
“Bhakui (ot faith) is not shardha (or belief). Belief may be merely subsidiary to ceremonial works, not
so faith. Belief is a preliminary or subsidiary to faith, but is not faith.”!° This is Sandilya’s definition of bhakiz.
Purther, development of Vaisnavism started in the South, far away from the earlier centres. Dr Tara
Chand feels that this development took place as a reaction to the impact of Islam. But, this issue is not
relevant to our purpose since we ate mainly concerned with the nature and content of this development. A
chain of Alvar saints appeared, extending over a long period of time.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
In the following pages, starting with Ramanuja, we shall briefly indicate the systems and views of the
chief exponents and saints of this new Vaisnava bhakti movement.
Ramanuja : The successful crusade of Sankara in favour of his Advaita, under which the world was
mithya or illusory, gave an ideological set-back to the need and importance of all devotional systems. For
Sankara, Brahman alone was real. By this onslaught, the basis for the cult of idol and devotional worship
was being eroded. This was also the period of the Alvars who constituted two classes, the saints, who
composed the devotional songs, and the Acharyas, who were the philosophers and teachers of the doctrine.
Ramanuja, on the direction of his guru, took upon himself the task of tracing from the scriptures, and the
Brahma Sutras, the justification and basis for this religion of worship prevalent in his time. According to him,
the world is real and there are three eternal principles of Brahman, God (Ishvara), individual souls, and the
world (prakriti). The individual soul and the insensate world are deemed to be the attributes or body of
Brahman, just as the soul has a human body. The three elements are different but the embodied parts,
though different, are one. These three parts are inseparable and eternal. Before creation, the body of the
Supreme Soul is in a subtle form. At that time, matter and souls are in Him, in an unmanifest form. After
creation, He has them in His body in a manifest form. Thus, Brahman or God is both the material and the
efficient cause of the world and controls it from within. The soul and the world are a mode of the Supreme,
eternal but dependent on Him. Man is identical with God. As in the Gita, the system of changes of prakniti
for the creation of Asankara, activity, etc., is the same as in Sankhya, except that God is there to guide it.”
Ishvara has a wonderful celestial body with Lakshmi as His consort. Ishvara appears in five forms : (1)
as Narayana or Para-Vasudeva, he lives, adorned with ornaments and gems, in Vaikuntha on a throne
surrounded by Sesa (serpent), Garuda and other delivered souls; (2) as his four forms in the world, including
that of Vasudeva to enable men to worship Him, (3) as the ten a#ars, fish, tortoise and others; (4) as present
in each being even when one goes to heaven or hell; and (5) as in the idols kept in the houses. For Ramanuja,
the ritualism of the Vedas and the Brahma Vidya of the Upanishada are equally important. Rituals are not
for a lower class of people, nor do they give a lower truth. He thinks that rituals prescribe the method of
worship. These he accepts fully, as also the caste system. The doctrines relating to Brahman (Brahm Vidya),
and that about rituals form one system. These are not addressed to different categories of persons as is
believed by Sankara. For Ramanuja, Karam Marga includes the Vedic rituals, the worship of idols, and the
repeating of mantras.
Souls are of three kinds : (1) the bound ones, (2) the delivered ones, and (3) the eternal souls like
Garuda. Of the bound ones, some seek wealth and others seek heaven. Some of them are devotees of
Bhagavat and some worship other gods or aviars. Of those who desire deliverance, some seek the
consciousness of the pure soul (eva/in) and others strive for eternal bliss. Of the latter, some seek God
through bhakti. For them the study of Vedas and the philosophy of sacrifices and rites is necessary. But, this
bhakti is open to the three higher castes only and not to Sudras. The caste system and Vedic ritualism are fully
maintained.! In fact, the dietary rules made and practised by this sect are very rigid and exclusive. Every one
has to cook one’s own food. And if per chance another person casts his glance on the food while the disciple
is cooking or eating it, the entire victuals have to be thrown away or buried as having been polluted.”
But the Sudras can resort to Prapaft’, or surrender to God, after renouncing the world. For the
efficacy of bhakti, Karma Yoga and Jnana Yoga are essential. The first involves the performance of all
prescribed acts, rituals, sacrifices, ceremonies, pilgrimages, and the worship of idols. Jana Yoga means the
gaining of cognitive knowledge of one’s being separate from prakriti and being an Attribute of God. These
two preparatory steps lead to bhakti which consists in meditations, accompanied by the yoga practices of
Yama, Niyama, etc. Thus, for Ramanuja, the preliminary knowledge of Jnana and Karma_yoga is necessary for
bhakti. "These methods include : (1) the use of un-polluted and unprohibited food, (2) chastity, (3) constant
practice, (4) performing the rites and sacrifices according to one’s means, (5) virtuous acts of truth,
compassion, ahimsa, uprightness, (6) hopefulness and (7) absence of elatedness. Bhak#, as done by these
seven means, leads to one’s seeing God.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
As against it, ‘Prapatti’ involves complete self-surrender. In the Padma-Purana seven other modes of
worship ate also suggested. They are all ritualistic and formal, e.g. (1) the imprinting of marks on the body
and the forehead, (2) the repeating of mantras, (3) the drinking of water used for washing the feet of the idol
of Hari, (4) the eating of the cooked food offered to the idol, (5) the service of devotees, (6) the observing of
fasts on the fixed days of the lunar month, (7) the laying of Tulsi leaves on the idol; etc.
This bhakti has no ethical bias or emphasis. It is bhakti of a formal nature without the kind of love
that fructifies into a moral life for the service of man. On the basis of the study of Alvar saints, Hooper
asserts that there is no necessary connection between bhak#i and moral character. In this regard, he
particularly cites the example of one Alvar saint, Tirumangai.** Maitra, who has discussed the problem of
Hindu ethics and the problem of ideal life in all Hindu schools of orthodox philosophy, including that of the
Vaishesika, the Purva Mimansa, Sankara, Ramanuja, Madhava and Vallabhacharya, comes to the conclusion that
a common feature of all these doctrines of ideal life or moksha is “the conception of the ideal as a negation, or
at least as a transcendence, of the empirical life proper, and that this state is thus a super-moral spiritual ideal
rather than a strictly moral ideal.’”’*> And after achieving the state of moksha, there is hardly anything to be
done. It is a negative and quietist ideal without any activity, except that in the case of Ramanmuja’s system
one has to do unconditional scriptural works like the daily rituals, bathing in the Ganges on the day of lunar
or solar eclipse, etc. As such, in Vaisnavism, the otherworldly ideal or goal has been accepted. It is a
transcendental state of deliverance from all the struggle of life. It is generally and essentially a state of
quiescence.” In all these systems, including that of the Vishnu Purana, release from the bondage of the world
is sought.
Ramanuja’s bhakti does not mean boundless love; it only involves Upasana or meditation. It is a
doctrine of identity. Upto the end of life, one must carry out all ritualistic duties and duties of one’s station in
life, i.e. the caste duties.
Like the Bhagavad Gita, Ramanuja’s Vashisht Advaita or theism is also syncretic and incorporates the
chief elements of the Sanvkbya and yoga, and of Vedic ritualism. The world and souls are the body of
Brahman both in their manifest and unmanifest forms. On the metaphysical side, the system is broadly
pantheistic, God being the material cause of the world, and, Ishvara, the souls and the material world being the
constituents of Brahman. In a way, the system is also pluralistic, as souls and prakriti are eternal. The socio-
religious sanctity of the caste system is fully accepted and confirmed. The continuance of the Brahminical
system for the worship of images is justified. For bhakti, the world has virtually to be given up and celibacy
maintained. Full sanction is given to faith in the scriptures and the observance of Vedic rites and other
prescribed pilgrimages and fasts. The worldly activity, including all moral life, is considered to be a
movement of the eternal prakriti, from the bondage of which release is sought by resort to bhakti and
meditational methods. As in all the yogic systems, virtues are practised entirely with a view to preparation
and discipline for meditation. Virtuous acts, as such, have no social content or ends. They serve purely as
aids to meditation. In the social fields one has to do one’s caste duties, and the word &arma includes all
Vedic rituals, idol worship, and other ceremonies.?’
The deal is the attainment of Narayana, the enjoyment of bliss and deliverance from the world. The
system of training is the karma yoga, the Jnana yoga and the bhakti yoga (meditation). Though the householder
could follow the path of salvation, the Sanyas Ashram prescribed in the Upanishads leads to speedy salvation.
The tendency is towards otherworldliness. The person who has made the final achievement, is also obliged
to perform all the prescribed purificatory rituals (Aarma), like fasting and baths.
Madhava: \n Madhava’s system the separate existence of God, souls and material world is assumed.
Though God is the efficient cause of the world, all movement in it is due to the eternal prakriti which 1s its
material cause. The system is thus dualistic with a plural number of souls. As in the Gita, in substance, the
Sankhya system is accepted, except for the addition of a Personal God. Madhava believes that God is a
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
substance. The doctrine of incarnation is accepted. In his qualities and actions, the av/ar is identical with
God. Lakshmi is distinct from God but is dependent upon Him. She is co-extensive or co-eternal with God.
Souls are of three kinds : (a) those fit for attaining bliss, (b) those eternally undergoing transmigration, (c)
those fit for darkness only. Creation begins when God disturbs the equilibrium of Prakrit. Moksha can be
attained through devotional service but only by a soul fit for it.78
There are eighteen methods that help salvation, including (a) Vairagya or renunciation of the world
and its pleasures, (2) self-control, (3) self-surrender, (4) acquaintance with the lore, (5) attendance on the guru,
(6) knowledge got from the guru or a Vaisnava, and reflection on it, (7) devotion to God, (8) sympathy for
inferiors and love for equals, (9) the performance of vedic rites without the desire for fruit, (10) the avoidance
of prohibited acts or sins, (11) the knowledge of Visnu being the highest, and of the distinctions between
God and the world, prakritt and Purusas, God and the individuals, etc., (12) worship or Upasana, the hearing
of Sastras, meditation, etc. These steps lead to the direct knowledge of God which is cognitive. The
followers of Madhava use special marks, created sometimes even by heated metal, leaving permanent scars on
the body.”
The presence of the two classes of souls, that are not redeemable and are doomed to misery and
perdition, is something extremely incongruous in a theistic system. For it virtually limits the scope of human
freedom and divine grace. As no progress is envisaged for these souls, the system is partly deterministic.*
The ideal is the attainment of bliss. For liberation, the knowledge of God and self-knowledge are obtained
through the study of scriptures. For achieving such knowledge, meditation and reflection under a guru are
necessaty. Like Ramanuja, Madhava accepts the necessity of doing caste and ritual duties and feels that these
should be done throughout life. The performance of any worldly duties or moral acts by the spiritually
enlightened person is unnecessary. In short, here too the ideal of salvation is otherworldly. One has no
socio-political role. The goal is achieved by doing scriptural duties, the study of scriptures and meditation.
Nimbarka : Nimbarka’s system is monistic and also, in a way, pluralistic. He feels that the world,
souls and God are both distinct and identical (Bheda-Abheda). The first two have no independent existence,
but are dependent on God. His recommendations for the modes of bhak# are practically the same as those of
Ramanuja. He believes that Brahman had in it the rudiments of the world. By manifestation, Brahman
becomes the material cause of the world. The souls are numberless. By contact with maya or prakriti, the
form of the soul is distorted. The nature of soul can be known by the grace of God. In this system, the
Vedic ritualism, the theory of incarnation, the caste system and Sankhya are accepted. The approach is
otherworldly. The object is for the soul to know its own nature. This is achieved by dissociation from
prakriti and by the grace of God. The worship recommended is that of Radha-Krishna. This worship is
more devotional than that in the case of Ramanuja, but the approach to life remains otherworldly. Since the
individual soul is distorted by its contact with pra&riti, naturally the system involves ascetic withdrawal from
life.
Ramananda : All religions or bhakti systems prior to Ramananda excluded the Swdras from their fold.
They had to do the duties prescribed for their low castes and rise in status so as to be born as Brahmins.
Then alone they could tread the path of the Vaisnava bhaki#z. Ramananda’s reform extended to the effect that
lower castes, if admitted to the Vaisnava fold, could dine with the other disciples. For the rest, the system is
the same as of Ramanuja. Ramananda was originally a follower of Ramanuja and observed all the dietary
tules prescribed for the sect. Once when he had returned to the Mazb after a tour of the north, his co-
disciples objected to his laxity in the strict observance of the prescribed dietary rules. On the matter being
reported to the head of the Math, the guru agreed with the objection and sided with the critics. In sheer
disgust, Ramananda left the order of Ramanujas and formed a new sect with the only difference that the strict
dietary rules were partly relaxed.3! Ramananda’s deity was Rama with Sita as his consort.
Tulsidas : Though a disciple of Ramananda, Tulsidas’s philosophy leans towards spiritual monism.
Like other saints of Vaisnavism, he accepts the rigidity of the caste system, even though his guru Ramananda
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
had, to an extent, relaxed it for admitted Vaisnavas. He is conservative and otherworldly. In his system there
is no emphasis on socio-moral conduct.
Vallabha : In Vallabha’s system, the devotee can continue to be a house-holder. He first took an
ascetic vow but later became a householder. He says that God has Himself become the world and the
individual souls, because the Supreme Soul was not happy while all alone. He decided to become many. The
system, is, thus, pantheistic.
Salvation is only through bhak#. Though one need not give up the householdet’s life, the method of
worship is entirely ritualistic, formal and ceremonial. Apart from the devotion of singing and praising God,
the devotee should rise early, drink the water in which the feet of the idol has been washed, utter the names
of Goverdhana and others, remember the river Yamuna, etc. Similarly, at other times of the day, there should
be image worship and the feeding of the deity, accompanied by other ceremonies, like aarti, the ringing of
bells, the blowing of the conchshell, bathing, dressing and the feeding of the idol.*”
There are no public temples, but each guru, who is a householder, maintains a private temple at his
own house. At eight fixed intervals during the day, the devotee should visit the temple of the guru. The best
stage of salvation is that of joining the sport of Krishna and Radha in the highest place of heaven, called
Goloka. Vallabha’s system is not known for any new ideas except that he has excessively ritualised bhakit
and made it open to householders. It is believed that Vallabha’s devotion appears more dramatic than real.
Chaitanya : Born in Bengal, Chaitanya was a devotee of Radha and Krishna. He developed the
emotional side of the bhakti of Krishna and his consort. He composed songs, did fervent singing and ecstatic
dancing. This was his mode of approach to God. His disciples included persons of all castes and even
Muslims. For him the deeply emotional singing of the praises of God (Radha-Krishna) was the only method
of bhakti and salvation. While singing, the devotees would laugh, weep, jump and embrace each other in a
state of emotional outburst. Chaitanya became an ascetic and a samyasi. His loud singing became so charged
with feeling that he even swooned under the intensity of his emotion. For Chaitanya, Krishna is the highest
god who is so beautiful that he excites love in the hearts of all. He remained too busy in his emotional
singing, dancing and ecstasies to have any social involvement. Like Nimbarka, Chaitanya believes in identity
with a difference between the soul and God (Bheda-Abheda). God Krishna, can be approached by love alone.
Through continuous love, the soul becomes one with God, it becomes unconscious of its individual
existence, and is absorbed in Him. In spirit the soul is one with God and God appears in finite spirits. The
goal of life is the bliss of union in which the soul loses its consciousness. But actually they remain distinct.
In practice, most of the ‘Advaitas’, followers of Chaitanya, observe caste distinctions, but those who are
recluses or Bairagis do not do so. At the time of taking meals, caste distinctions are generally observed and
the cook is always a Brahmin.*® The teachers of this system are all celibates. The life of Chaitanya illustrates
the type of bhakti recommended by the Bhagavat Purana. Chaitanya mentions different kinds of love : (a) love
with awe and reverence for His greatness; it is the peaceful, calm and tender love (Shanta); (b) love with the
submission of the heart like that of a servant’s (Dasya) for his master; (c) the love of God as a friend (Sakhya);
and (d) the deepest love as of the wife for her husband (Madhura). The last kind is the sweetest and the
deepest as for a beloved. Chaitanya suggests the last kind.
THE SENSUAL METHOD
There is another feature of Vaisnavism. The worship of male and female gods has led to erotic
symbolism and ultimately to Tantric methodology. Ghurye has collected ample evidence to suggest that the
method, as an alternative spiritual path of moksha, has ancient and Puranic sanction. We may emphasise that
devotional systems like Vaisnavism that lay emphasis on celibacy, and involve worship of a female deity and
erotic symbolism, without human energies being channelised into moral and creative activities, almost
invariably end up as advocates of the sensual path for spiritual achievement. This leads to unfortunate results
and practices. This has happened in Buddhism, and in fact all the world over. This change has taken place in
Vaisnavism too.*# Even a modern Vaisnava saint too has recognised the sensual method as a valid, though a
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
difficult and risky, spiritual path.35 We may also here refer to the case of Dattatreya, the spiritual teacher of
Prahlada and Alarka. The Puranic accounts “depict him always in ecstasy, surrounded by women, drinking
wine and indulging in sex.” “He demands flesh and wine in human skull.’’%6 The Tantric Shastras have also
been called the fifth Veda of Hinduism.
CONCLUSION
We have made a brief survey of Vaisnavism which prescribes bhakti as one of the methods of moksha.
Let us now dtaw our conclusion about its thesis, trends, methodology and direction.
1. The Fundamentals: Vaisnavism has four fundamentals. Its basic scriptures are the Vedas and the
Upanishads which also form the foundations of the extereme ritualism of the original Vedic system (Purva
Mimansa), the monism of Sankara, the downgrading of the world as illusory, and the otherworldly and
meditational mysticism of the Upanishads. While each sect puts its own interpretation of the Vedas and
Upanishads, there is implicit faith in their scriptural authority and all that they stand for. Having accepted the
authority of the Vedas, Upanishads and the Gita, it could not ignore their social ideology and related
injunctions. For the first time, the Gita included the heterodox Bhagvatism in the Hindu fold and linked its
system of worship to the scriptural authority of the Vedas. The result was that the Vedic caste structure was
wholly accepted by this system of bhak#. Actually, this social system and its ideology became the second
fundamental of Vaisnavism to which it adhered completely. Ramanand’s modifications in the dietary
regulations were, perhaps, made, only as a personal reaction to his own conduct having been subjected to
severe criticism by his colleagues and his Guru for his having violated some dietary rules. This slight change
in the rules about eating only involved a virtual post-facto justification of his own conduct, without in the least
affecting the basis or the rigidity of the caste system. Evidently, this change neither formed an important, nor
an integral part of Ramanand’s religious system. This is also clear from the fact that Tulsidas, the chief
disciple of Ramanand, strictly believed in the sanctity and the rigid observance of the caste system. Even now
among Ramanand’s ascetics, only the higher three castes are freely admitted. Sudras and untouchables if and
when admitted have to maintain and worship in separate temples. In the temples of the first three castes,
they alone are allowed to enter. In actual practice only Brahmins cook food and serve the deity.*’ The theory
of avtarhood, the third fundamental of Vaisnavism, was, as we have seen, only an omnivorous method of
absorbing all kinds of divergent and heterodox systems in the Hindu fold. The ritualism of the Vedic religion
became its fourth fundamental. In fact, bhakiz itself was completely formalised and ritualised. The method of
worship almost became a system of mantras. This devotion towards the deity never turned towards love of
one’s fellow beings. In fact, the fundamental acceptance of the inequity of the caste system and the
formalism of bhaki# stood as a complete bar to any transformation of the love of God into the service or love
of man and suffering humanity. That is also the reason that good conduct never involved any act of social
morality or any activity to solve the difficulties and problems of one’s fellow beings. Moral life, at best, meant
only a sense of ritualistic or formal piety, without the least reaction to any social evil, injustice or cruelty,
much less to any political oppression or tyranny. Accordingly as was observed by Hooper, Vaisnava bhakit
never involved any change in the moral character or values of the devotee.
2. The Worldview: No doubt the world is deemed to be real. But, in view of the Sankhya-yoga
background and the ideal of moksha or liberation from Samsara, the entite approach and the attitude are
otherworldly. In Vaisnavism, the clear preference for celibacy and renunciation and its attitude towards
women also confirms this view. The overall metaphysical view is either pantheistic or dualistic, where co-
eternal prakriti is assumed. In the former case the world and souls are the body or qualities of Brahman.
Brahman is both the material and the efficient cause of the world. In the latter case, it is virtually the Sankhya-
yoga system with the addition of Ishvara as a Personal God. The soul forms a part of Brahman. Even if the
ideas of worship between man and God, and creature and the Creator, are mentioned, there is basic identity
between the soul and Brahman, the former being a part of the latter. Generally speaking, in theism, the world
is the creation of God, it is not co-eternal with Him. Hence, whatever name one may give to the Vaisnava
system, it is not theistic in the normal sense of the word; because even personalities like Kapila, Rasaba and
Buddha, who held atheistic views, were declared as aviars. Sharp divergence in the metaphysical views of its
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
philosophers like Ramanuja, Nimbarka, Madhava and Vallabha is also clearly symptomatic of its assorted and
syncretic character. In fact, none of its scriptures or its philosophers even attempted to reconcile its variant
and conflicting thoughts, or give it a unified ideology or methodology. Evidently, this was really not possible,
because its authority and theology are based on the Upanishads and the Bhagavad Gita which are admittedly
eclectic compilations expressing different thoughts and doctrines.
3. Doctrine of Ahimsa : Though in its early phase Vaisnavism could not emancipate itself from the
religion of sacrifices, yet later it accepted and stressed the observance of abimsa. Possibly, this change, too,
occurred under Buddhist influence. The Visnudharmottara Purana, while it permits sacrifice for religious
purpose, prohibits the destruction of even an insect or a fly, saying that there is nothing so sinful as eating
meat.*® It is quite significant that the Puranas state that the four forms of Narayana had abimsa as their
mother. In fact, ahimsa later became a cardinal principle of Vaisnavism. Both Ramanuja and Sankradeva
insisted upon it and did not allow meat-eating. However, Vaisnavism did not stop the kings from waging a
war.
4. The Goal: The goal is moksha. It means the return of the soul for merger in Brahman, or a state
of bliss and union with God, without involvement in the world of man. The aim is not the service of God or
man, nor is it the carrying out of His Will in the world. None of these matters receives any priority, the ideal
being liberation from the tangles of the world. In life, the jwanmukta has no social role to play, except that he
is still obliged to follow all the prescribed ritualistic duties. As such, there is no stress on the moral life
except for purposes of personal purity and as an aid to meditation.
5. Kind Of Bhakti: Another characteristic feature of the system is its changing concept of bhakit.
This change reveals both the growth and the goal of the system. Originally, bhak# involved only a sense of
favourable consideration, affinity, relationship or adoration between the BAakta and the deity; it was indeed a
sense of shared kinship. In the second phase of its history, the gap between the deity and the devotee
widened, and devotion took the shape of a system of formal worship, including ritualistic and idol worship.
This was the period when bhak# was only an alternative method of moksha, and the preliminary aid of Juana
and Karam Margas was essential for treading the path of bhakt#. This position continued even upto the time of
Ramanuja. It was only in the third phase of its development that the feeling or the emotional element
became prominent and central to bhak. It became virtually the sole path of liberation. This emotional bhakit
developed in two distinct directions. In the case of Vallabhacharya, it became quite dramatic and ritualistic,
accepting, to an extent, erotic symbolism. This trend naturally led to some unsavoury developments. In the
case of Mira Bai and Chaitanya, it took the form of extreme and ecstatic emotionalism, absorbing completely
the entire being and the personality of the devotee. While dancing and singing, Siri Chaitanya remained so
much surcharged with the intensity of his feelings, that he had hardly any time or willingness for anything
else. The goal of life is to lose one’s consciousness under the intensity of the joy of union. It is believed that
he lost his life while in an ecstatic trance of such a union Chaitanya suggested the madhura (as between wife
and husband) kind of love which he considered to be the deepest and most intense. But Sankradeva
recommended the dasya type of love (as between the servant and the master) because the results of the
madbura type of love, he felt, could be disastrous for the devotee.”
In all these various forms of bhak# one thing is common and significant. This bbakt remained only a
relation between man and God and never flowed into the field of social responsibility or moral deeds. It was
a bhakti which isolated the devotee from the world as much as was done by asceticism or renunciation.
Whether this insulation and otherworldliness were due to the acceptance of the caste ideology, or to
Vaisnavism’s preference for celibacy and its attitude towards women, or to its faith in excessive formalism or
ritualism, is beside the point. But, the broad fact is that this bhak# remained unresponsive to and
unconcerned with the social and moral problems of man. It did not accept the principle of the equalilty and
the brotherhood of man, as is normally done under a theistic system.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
6. Social Ideology: In Hinduism, caste divisions had become established and well-formed during the
Upanishadic times.*! Either because of Buddhist influence, or because of the need for absorption of non-
Aryan tribes, or because of any other reason, the Bhagavad Gita for the first time admitted Sudras and
women to the path of bhaktz, But, otherwise the Bhagavad Gita emphatically upheld the social ideology of
caste. Lord Rama, too, severed the head of a Sudra for doing rites not allowed to his caste under the Vedic
injunctions.4? Such being the social approach of two of the incarnations of Visnu, Vaisnavism, thus, fully
endorsed the social philosophy of Brahminism. Even now among the Vaisnava Sadhus only Brahmins can
cook food. In addition the worship of the deity is the sole preserve of the Brahmins. Even Ramanuja, who
opened the system of Prapati to Shudras, in a way confirmed the system of caste-divisions by closing the
gates of Vaisnava bhakti to Sudras and instead permitting them only to the system of self-surrender.
Systems that are ascetic or monastic have generally a harsh attitude towards women. There is little
doubt that the ancient religious traditions of India were largely ascetic. Asceticism is considered to be a
typically Indian contribution to the world, since this trait was un-known to the ancient cultures of Egypt,
Babylonia and Persia.*# In the early Indian tradition, woman had been looked upon as a temptress and an
impediment in the spiritual life of man. In the course of time, the emphasis on monasticism and celibacy
increased in Vaisnavism. Accordingly, the position of women worsened in the social and religious fields. In
Bhagavad Bhasya, Ramanuja writes, “By putting trust in me, even women, the Vaisyas or the Sudras, though
sin-born, do yet go to the supreme state.”44 Both Ramanuja and Sankradeva, otherwise liberal religious
teachers, did not permit women to join the Vaisnava order. Ramanuja denied the facility of Vedic study to
women.* They were not permitted to mix with men for devotion, nor were they allowed to give up
household duties and become nuns. The ideas of Sankaradeva on this issue were even more rigid. He stated,
“Of all the terrible aspirations of the world, woman’s is the ugliest. A slight side glance of her’s captivates
even the hearts of celebrated sages. Her sight destroys prayer, penance and meditation. Knowing this, the
wise keep away from the company of women.’ He did not allow women to join the religious functions of
men. They did their chanting only in the courtyard, and that too not simultaneously with men. He never
accepted women as his disciples, nor gave Nama-mantra to a woman; nor allowed them to be nuns. Except on
certain days, even uptil now, women are not allowed to enter the Kirtanghar of the sect.
In such a climate the growth of the ideas of the equality and brotherhood of man could hardly be
possible.
All the same, some of its saints like Sankaradeva relaxed, to some extent, the Brahminical social
injunctions against the Sudras. However, food cooked by a Sudra was not taken by a Brahmin even though a
Vaisnava.‘” Vaisnavism, which to start with, was a religion of the wealthy and the elite, became quite popular
among the masses. The chief reason for its acceptance by them was the simplicity of its methods of worship
compared to the expensive and elaborate Brahminical system of sacrifices and rituals.
It has been considered a meaningful coincidence, that the Bhagavad Gita, while it accepted women
and Sudras to the path of worship, simultaneously gave religious sanction to the rigidity of the social system.
The result was that Vaisnava bhakti remained intimately linked with the social ideology of the caste, including,
as we have seen, its attitude towards women. Even an outstanding saint philosopher like Ramanuja, while
admitting Sudras to Prapatt, considers women and Sudras to be sin-born. It meant that Vaisnavism, except
for religious purposes, always approved of the social ideology of Brahminism. That is also why, even though
Vaisnavism laid stress on the doctrine of ahimsa and non-meat eating, it permitted the kings to wage wars and
sacrifice animals for ritualistic ends.
In short, Vaisnava bhakti remained a system completely at ease with the social divisions and
distinctions of the times and found nothing inconsistent between its deep devotion towards the deity, and the
social discrimination against the lower castes and women. Therefore, in classifying Vaisnava bhaki it cannot
be ignored that in this religious system and its worldview the hierarchical or the graded social ideology
became an integral part of it.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Let us apply the test of unity of perception, ideology and activity and trace the ideology and religious
perception of the Vaisnava bhak#. The major objective activity of Vaisnava bhak#z has been the maintenance
of the caste system. Accordingly, its religious ideology, as reflected in the social field or its social activities as
giving a clear clue to its religious ideology, point towards the same conclusion, namely, that its worldview, or
its theism was not only congruous with the caste system but gave full religious sanction to it. For, even a
liberal saint like Sankaradeva was never bothered about making any social change; his concern was only with
affording religious fellowship. “He saw his vocation only in establishing religious freedom and fellowship
rather than social overhaul. To trouble about the improvement of social conditions, perhaps, deemed to him
as little profitable.’’48
As revealed in its theory of incarnation, the aims and ideals of Vaisnava bhakti have been quite clear
and consistent during the long course of its history. The reason for it is its faithful acceptance of the
scriptural and religious authority of the Vedas, Upanishads, the Bhagavad Gita and the Sastras. And
Dattatraya, too, with all his Puranic descriptions, was regarded a Paramhansa and an incarnation of Visnu.
We therefore, conclude that Vaisnava bhakti is a class by itself. It is not easy to find its parallel either
in the Indian tradition or outside it.
SIKHISM AND VAISNAVISM: A COMPARISON
Our survey and the history of the system show that Vaisnavism is in every way a part and parcel of
the Brahminical tradition and its complex of systems. As of all other Hindu systems, Vedas and Upanishads
are its scriptures. The answers of Vaisnavism on the twelve issues ate opposed to those given by Sikhism.
Vaisnavism accepts the four fundamentals of Hinduism indicated earlier. In addition, it has faith in the
mystic potency of words and mantras. The theory of the avsars of Visnu is, in fact, a Vaisnava creation and
not a part of the earlier Vedic system. Probably, because of its faith in the Vedic system, bhak# in Vaisnavism
is basically formal and ritualistic, without its ever fructifying into virtuous deeds in the social field. The
Vaisnava bhakti remains confined to meditational practices, and formal and devotional idol worship in the
temples.
But, Sikhism clearly denies the four principles of Vaisnavism. Not only is the scriptural authority of
the Vedas and Upanishads repudiated, but the Gurus are critical of the Vedic injunctions. “The distinctions
of high and low, castes and colour, hell and heaven, introduced by the Vedas are misleading.’’*? There are
numerous hymns clearly denying the atar character of all Vaisnava gods.
Having rejected the fundamentals of Vaisnavism, the question of any similarity between the two
systems does not arise. While Sikhism is strictly theistic, Vaisnavism is, broadly speaking, pantheistic. In
Vaisnavism, the emphasis is merely on formal devotional methods divorced from deeds. And this devotion
involves an otherworldly life, leaning towards samyasa and celibacy. In Sikhism, the path is entirely different.
Sheer devotional dancing is considered to be of no consequence.® It is the virtuous deeds that are of essence
in Sikh spiritual life. “With God, only the deeds one does in the world are of any avail.*! “Without good
deeds no formal worship is possible.”>? “Vice is our enemy and virtue the only friend.” “It is by our deeds
that we become near or away from God.’”4
The Vaisnava saints were too preoccupied with formal devotion to enter the social field. Not even
one of them did so, nor did their devotional system permit it, much less prescribe it.
As against it, the Gurus insist on virtuous deeds so as to seek the Grace of God. The Guru Nanak
started the organisation of the Sikh Panth. The Fifth Guru invited the wrath of contemporary Mughal ruler,
Jahangir, for having blessed the rebel prince Khusro. Instead of paying the heavy fine, he preferred to face
martyrdom at the hands of the Mughal authorities. The Sixth Guru fought battles with the Imperial forces.
The Seventh Guru attempted to come to the military aid of Dara,» the rebel against the then Emperor. The
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Eighth Guru died very young. Aurangzeb suggested to the Ninth Guru not to dabble in the socio-political
field. But, he rejected this suggestion® and sought martyrdom by openly coming to the aid of the Kashmiri
Pandits in defiance of the imperial policy of religious persecution.*’ The Tenth Guru’s creation of the Khalsa
and confrontation with the Empire is well-known.
There is another major difference between the two. Vaisnavism accepts the sensual path as an
alternative spiritual approach, but Sikhism rejects it outright.
The conclusion is evident that there is an obvious contrast between Vaisnavism and Sikhism on all
the essentials of the two systems and the issues stated by us. The worldview of Sikhism is life-affirming and
ethical. The worldview of Vaisnavism involves a virtual withdrawal from the world.
REFERENCES
1. Bhandarkar, R.G. : Vaisnavism and Saivism, p. 3.
2. Jaiswal, Mrs. S. : The Origin and Development of Vaisnavism, p. 04.
3. Nbid.; pedis
4, Zaehner, R.C. : Mysticism Sacred and Profane, Bhandarkar : op. cit., p. 1, Hirtyanna M. : Essentials of
Indian Philosophy, p. 53.
5. Jaiswal : op.cit. p. 111-112.
6. Ibid., p. 119.
7. Hiriyanna, M. : op.cit. p. 53.
8. Ibid., p. 55.
9. Jaiswal, op.cit. pp. 214-215.
10.Murthy, H.V.S : Vaisnavism of Shankradeva and Ramanuja, pp. 201-202.
11. Annie Besant : Bhagavad Gita (English Translation) : pp. 252-254.
12. Bhandarkar : op.cit. p. 40-41.
13. Jaiswal, op.cit. p. 114.
14.Das Gupta : Hindu Mysticism, pp. 117, 38-42.
15. Jaiswal, op.cit. pp. 155, 119, 132.
16. Ibid., pp. 214-15.
17. Bhandarkar, op.cit. p. 47.
18.Spencer, S.: Mysticism in World Religions, p. 49.
19.Cowell : J.R.A.S., p. 1907.
20. Bhandarkar, op.cit. pp. 52-54.
21.Ibid., pp. 54-55.
22.Wilson, H.H., Refigious Sects of Hindus, p. 19.
23. Bhandarkar, op.cit. p. 55.
24. Spencer, S., op.cit. p. 58.
25. Miatra, S.K., The Ethics of the Hindus, p. 244.
26. Ibid., pp. 263, 265-266.
27. Bhandarkar, op.cit. p. 54.
28. Ibid., pp. 58-60.
29. Ibid., p. 61.
30. Hiriyanna, M., op.cit. p. 192.
31. Wilson, Religious Sects of Hindus, p. 24.
32. Bhandarkar, op.cit. p. 80.
33.Ibid., p. 86, Ghurye, p. 171.
34. Briges, G.W., Gorakh Nath and Kanphata Yogis, pp. 350-51.
35.Zimmer, H., Philosophies of India, p. 590.
36.Ghutrye, G.S., Indian Sadhus, pp. 34-35.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
37. Ibid., p. 171.
38. Jaiswal, op.cit. pp. 115-118, 212.
39. Ibid., pp. 116-118.
40. Murthy, op.cit. p. 232.
41. Ibid., p. 194.
42.Senart, E., Caste in India, p. 100.
43.Ghurye, op.cit. p. 1.
44,Murthy, op.cit. p. 196.
45. Ibid., pp. 201-202.
46. Ibid., pp. 201-202.
47. Ibid., pp. 201-202.
48. Ibid., p. 203.
49.Guru Granth Sahib, p. 1243.
50. Ibid., p. 465.
51.Ibid., pp. 1383, 26.
52. Ibid., p. 4.
SJ bid pioes.
54. Ibid., p. 11.
55.Gupta, H.R., Héstory of the Sikh Gurus, p. 130.
56. Banerjee, A.C., in Journal of Sikh Studies Vol. 111, (Feb, 1976) p. 61.
57.Gupta, H.R., op.cit. p. 140.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
16
THE RADICAL BHAGATS
DALJEET SINGH
1. INTRODUCTORY
The Radical Bhagats constitute another school of bhak#. This group has also been called, though
erroneously, the Nirgwn Bhagats, or even the sant tradition. They have been given a separate name because
discerning observers feel that there is a wide gap between their doctrines and those of Vaisnavism. Similarly,
there is an equally wide gap, if not wider still, between the Radical bhakt# and the Sikh bhakti. This raises three
issues. How is this system different from Vaisnavism, what are the special features of this group and how is it
variant from Sikhism ? The last issue we shall examine after considering the first two which will be dealt with
now.
Unfortunately, not very much is known of the lives of these saints. A considerable part of the
available material is replete with the stories of miracles performed by them. It does not give their precise
views, not does it give a helplful account of their biographies and socio-religious doctrines. Neither can the
compilations of their hymns, made mostly about 150 to 200 years after the demise of the concerned saints, be
deemed to be entirely authentic. Therefore, the need for some caution and sifting is there so as to make a
realistic appreciation of the religious views of these Bhagats.
In this study, we shall mainly deal with Bhagat Kabir and refer very briefly to saint Nam Dev. The
reasons for taking up Kabir are three. He is, without doubt, not only a pioneer in the field but is also the
tallest of them. Secondly, he is typically representative of the group. Thirdly, comparatively, his hymns are
probably the largest in number and have some authenticity, because these form the religious guide of the
Kabir-panthis and Dadu-panthis. For this study, we shall refer mainly to the Byak, which is known as the
Eastern or the Kabirpanthi version of the saint’s bani, and also to the hymns in the Guru Granth Sahib and
the Kabir Granthavii, the Dadu-panthi or the Rajasthani version.
2. RADICAL BHAKTI AND VAISNAVISM
Vaisnavism, we find, stands on four pillars, namely, the scriptural sanctity of the Vedas and the
doctrines these prescribe, the theory of avtarhood of Visnu, the social ideology of caste, and the formalism
and ritualism of its methodology and its devotional and idol worship. Kabir emphatically repudiates all these
fundamentals.
As to the Vedas, he says : “The Vedas and the book are two spread nooses; realise that thou are
snared therein.”! “Nine bhaktis, Vedas, the Book, these are the cloaks of falsehood.’? “The four Vedas are
fictitious stories.”> “Heed not the sayings of the world or Vedas.’’4 “O, thou, that knowest Brahman, be not
led astray by the Vedas and the world.”> “Renounce the Vedas and the book, O’ Pandit; these are fictions of
the mind.’’6 “QO” brother, these Smrities are the daughters of the Vedas, but these have come with chains and
ropes to bind us. The chain behaves like a female serpent and devours the entire world. Under our eyes this
has plundered the whole world.” Says Kabir, “I have released myself from this chain of Smriti””’ “The
Vedas and Puranas are the mirror of the blind, what does the spoon know of the taste of the delicacies.” In
“Pipaji ki Bani” (Pipa is another saint of this group), the author says that if Kabir had not lived in the Kas-
_yuga, the Vedas in conspiracy with Ka/-yuga would have thrown bhakii to the underworld.°
True, there are some hymns of Kabir which speak well of the Vedas, but his rejection of them is too
categorical to suggest that he had considered them as reliable guides for the spiritual path.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Kabir is equally emphatic in denying the theory of incarnation or the spiritual character of Vaisnava
avtars or gods. In fact, he denounces the very idea of incarnation : “vaya has sprung from the mind, the ten
aviars, Brahma and Visnu passed away deluded.”!° “There was no Mahadeva, no Krishna, no Mohammad, nor
any fish, tortoise or Rama, etc. Dattatreya did not know the secret, he was vainly entangled in his
appetites.”!! Kabir mentions the avtars of Visnu only to show that they all are of no consequence or of any
spiritual status. “Many the Ramachandras, so austere, who preserved the world; Many the flute-bearing
Krishnas, but none reached the Whole;!2 They took the form of fish and tortoise and boar, they took the
name of dwarf; many were the Buddhas, the stainless, but none reached the Whole.”’3 “On one side stand
gods, men and ‘munis’, on the other, she (aya) alone. Indra and Krishna are standing at her door, their eyes
hungry with longing.”!* “She (maya) ran in pursuit of Shiva and Brahma and made both her captives.”!> He
calls Visnu to be the author of maya. “Casting the angle of action, he has caught the whole world. I can
annul his dominion and speed the soul across this ocean. I can make you fearless, test this mintage.”! He
considers Brahma to be guilty of offence and thefts.'”
Kabir’s tirade against caste is very out-spoken. He says that all men have been created from one
Light and from the same clay and blood. The same blood runs in the veins of the Sudra and the Brahmin.
How can the Brahmin claim superiority, when they are all born the same way.!* “They live from age to age
who renounce all caste and pride of race.”’!
Kabir’s condemnation of all kinds of ritualism and the formal worship of idols and gods is also quite
severe. “Devotion, sacrifice and rosary, piety, pilgrimage, fasting and alms, _...... these are cloaks of
falsehood.””? “By all his worship, not one sin is removed; by singing his praises one is drowned in the
world.”’?! “O, Kabir, all spoiled bhakt# by laying stones and pebbles.” “If by repeating Rama’s name, the
world is saved, then by repeating the word “Sugar”, the mouth should become sweet.”
Kabir’s denunciation of Vaisnavism as a system is quite unambiguous. For, he says that it is devoid
of the real bhaktv of God. He even calls all kinds of earlier bhaktis as cloaks of falsehood. Kabit’s views are
diametrically opposed to all the basic doctrines of Vaisnavism. He and his group of saints completely reject
Vaisnava scriptures. Not only is the av/ar theory denied, but Lord Visnu and his avéars are clearly disregarded.
Caste ideology, dietary rules and ritual observances formed the basis of the social system of Vaisnavism.
These were so much an integral part of the system that, though Vaisnavism subscribed to the doctrine of
ahimsa, it permitted kings and Kashatriyas to wage a righteous war. In fact, Arjuna was goaded by Lord
Krishna not to shirk his caste duty of fighting for a just cause. Ramanuja, the chief exponent of Vaisnavism,
was extremely strict in the observance of caste and dietary rules. In order to maintain purity, “all the
Ramanujas cook for themselves; and, should the meal during this process, or whilst they are eating, attract
even the looks of a stranger, the operation is instantly stopped and the viands buried in the ground.’’+ We
have seen that Ramananda, who was originally a follower of Ramanuja, was censured by his co-disciples and
the guru for suspected laxity in the strict observance of these dietary rules. Ramananda was enraged and this
led to his break with Ramanuja and the Ma/b. As against the graded social system and allied formalism being
a sanctified part of the religious structure of Vaisnavism, Kabir and his group swore by the principle of ‘the
fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man.’ In fact, many of the Radical Bhaktas belonged to the low
castes who could normally not be admitted as equals in the Vaisnava socio-teligious system. May be, owing
to its Vedic heritage, ritualism, mantras and all kinds of formalism in worship have a distinct value and
validity in Vaisnavism. The Radical Bhaktas not only discarded all that but ridiculed it. In fact, they attacked
Vaisnavism and Vaisnava bhakti as a whole. Evidently, the two systems are so much apart, and even opposed
to each other, that there is hardly a meeting ground between them.
3. KABIR
Before we draw any inferences, we shall give a brief description of the life and system of Kabir.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
(i) Life : There is little doubt that Kabir was an abandoned child who was lifted and adopted by a
poor Muslim couple of the weaver class. Kabir’s connection with the Sufis in the early years of his life
appeats quite probable, if not conclusively established.?5 All the same, it is plain from Kabir’s hymns that his
search for and union with the Eternal are purely a personal achievement. He was not linked to either a Hindu
saint or a Sufi pir. Kabir married and had children. A hymn of Kabir would suggest that he married twice.
He calls his first wife ugly and the second one beautiful. He says, “It is just and proper that my first wife is
dead.” To us it appears that the relevant lines only refer to Kabir having given up the way of the world and
adopted the way of God. Kabir did not leave his home, nor joined a hermitage or a khankah. But his hymns
show that both his mother and wife complained that he was little interested in his profession; and that while
his family remained poor and without even adequate food, he neglected his work and remained busy in the
company of saints. No wonder the author of Dabistan describes him as a bairagi. Undoubtedly, both Kabit’s
life and his hymns show a strong ascetic trend.”’ But, we shall detail this point while considering his approach
to the world.
Both Bhandarkar and Mohan Singh have given ample chronological and other evidence to show that
Kabir was not the disciple of any living saint. There is hardly any reference to a living guru in his hymns.
This negative evidence is of great significance when we know that he believed in the sanctity and the
importance of the institution of guruship. As in the case of Guru Nanak, the word ‘Gurw’ in Kabit’s bani
refers to God. This view is also supported by Mohan Singh.?8
(it) Cosmology : Kabit’s views about the creation of the world are somewhat his own, though to an
extent mythical. God created Niranjana who created the world. In the beginning was Sabad. There is an
impress of Word on all creation.?? Desire was made in the form of a woman. Niranjana created this woman
ot maya Everything grew from her. Brahma, Vishnu and Mahesh were born to her. She also created three
daughters for this trinity. Later, the world and all forms were created through them.*! Ultimately, everything
will be reabsorbed in Him.
(iii) Idea Of God: As is usual with non-ascetic saints, Kabir’s description of God could lead both to
theistic and pantheistic inferences. “He is all created things.” “And the Lord Himself taking form.’”? “From
one egg of Onkar, all world is formed.” “Himself God, Himself the leaf that is offered.” He also calls God,
Absolute and Attributeless.*3 His description is quite paradoxical. For, he calls Him both with and without
Attributes, Personal and Impersonal, Transcendent and Immanent.** Kabir being essentially a Bhagat, many of
his hymns clearly point to a loving adoration of a Personal God. He calls Him “Father” and “Mother.” He
says, “Kabir has found the Elixir of love.”3> And love can be expressed only towards a Personal God. “I play
with God and there is no separation.’ “There is no one Liberal like you and sinner like me.’’37 Kabit’s
metaphysical thoughts, like those of the Sufis, would appear to be pantheistic, but like the Sufis, he too
believes in a personal and loving relationship with Him. In one of his Ramainis, he takes a clear theistic stand.
Por, he rejects that there is identity between man and God at the final stage, as suggested by Chandogaya
Upanishad in its phrase “That thou art.”38 From the overall point of view, the monotheism of Kabir and
other Radical Bhagats appears clear. The reason for the seeming ambiguity is that descriptions of mystic
experience, which is non-sensory, can at best be symbolic. And, such symbolic descriptions, being inadequate
are liable to be misunderstood or misinterpreted.
Kabir states that God is immanent and is present in all hearts. As such, it is possible to have a
personal relationship of union with Him.*? This is the only worthwhile goal for man. Kabir so often claims
such a blissful union.
(iv) Goal: For Kabir, the goal of life is to have a blissful union with God. In this union, the
personality almost disappears. Kabir says, “I have attained the Supreme State.” Even after the union, the
identity of the mystic remains separate. “I am a fish in God’s water.’ It is an intuitive realisation, a union of
soul and God. It is a love as of wife for her husband.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Kabir’s cosmogenic utterances show similarity with both Muslim and Hindu thought. But, his
description of the ascent to God is distinctly of the Sufi character and resembles that given by Hallaj.
“Abandoning the actions pertaining to humanity (waswZ), one sees the sphere of angels (Ma/aku/), then leaving
even the sphere of Majesty (Jabarut) one gets the vision of divinity (H/abui); but when these four are left
behind, then comes “Lahu?’, where there is no death or separation and where Yama (God of death) finds no
entrance. Humanity (Nasu?) is darkness, Ma/akut is angelic, in Jabarut shines the Majestic Light (Nwalal), in
Lahut one finds Beautiful Light (Narjamal) and in Habut is the dwelling place of Truth (Hagq).”41 Kabir’s four
stages of bhakti have also been compared to the four stages of Sufi Ibadat i.e. of Shariat, Tarikat, Hagiqat and
Marfat.” It is without doubt that many of Kabir’s views are identical with Sufi thought and practices.
(v) Approach To The World: Wabir’s approach to the world is very revealing of his religious thought.
Here too his views about the reality of the world are ambiguous. There are many statements of Kabir that
suggest that the world is not real. “Nothing in the world is true and real. It is all illusory.” He calls it a
dream or a hallucination. “The play is false. The player is true.” “This world is but a trafficking in
phantoms. At the end, there is nothing at all.”45 “It is the shadow of a cloud.”’46 Once when asked whether or
not the world was real, he replied, “Can Rajaram cook cakes of ice ? Can man in his senses eat them ? Cana
lion seated in his den prepare betel ? Can a mammoth rat serve it when made up ? Can a mouse sing a song
of rejoicing from house to house ? Can a tortoise blow a shell ?, etc.”’*’ This reply and many of his other
statements would show that the world is not real. But, we have already quoted many of Kabit’s pantheistic
statements like, “He is all created things.” Such an ambiguous approach towards the world is not peculiar to
Kabir; it is so with the Sufis and also many quietist mystics like Eckhart.
But, there is one point on which Kabir is very vocal, repetitive, and emphatic. There are numerous
hymns which suggest that the world is a trap laid for man to divert him from the true path of union with
God. Kabir thinks the world to be maya, but his idea of maya is different from that of Sankara. He repeatedly
likens maya to a woman whose tole is to entice man on to the wrong path. Kabir never looks upon the
activities of the world to be worthwhile. In fact, he finds the world almost a place of misery and a vale of
tears. “The guru of this Kalyuga is full of viles; by the robbery he practices, he slew the whole world.”48 As
stated earlier, Kabir deems Niranjana, whom he also calls Ka/and Ka/ Purash, to be the creator of the world.”
Kal and maya, he says, separate man from God, and both strive to mislead man and bhagats away from God. It
is Niranjana who created a woman or maya, and both try to entangle man in the vicious ways of the world.*°
Kabir virtually attributes to Ka/ and maya the same role as is attributed to Satan, who is out to entice and
mislead man. Kabir says, “First desire was made in the form of a woman, Gayatri.”>! “One woman (maya)
deludes and devours all men.” “One woman has spread her net, fear overcomes all men.’ “There is a roof
of falsehood; it spreads over the earth and sky. In all the religions it has beset the soul.” “TI kill, I burn, I
devour, my name is Niranjana.’’>+ “Having a serpent noose within her, she has plundered and devoured all the
world.”>> “Maya sportingly plays the temptress, the whole world she has taken captive.”>° “God men, munis,
deities, Gorakh, Datta and Vyas, Sanaka and Sananda lost at the game, what hope have others ?”57 “T shall
escape from the world untrammeled.”>* “Maya is mad. ...... and she goes forth to hunt for the prey. The wise
and polished she chose and slew. She has not spared the ascetic, the yogi, deep in his meditation, the Jangam
in the jungle. Swami doing worship, Machhindarnath and others.’* “Maya is the serpent wife that preys on
the world.” “The woman’s (maya’s) husband knows not the shame.” “On one side stand gods and munis, on
the other side is she alone.”®! “The three worlds are a cage, virtue and vice, a net, all souls become a prey,
there is one hunter, Ka/”® “I saw the whole world burning, each one in his own fire.” “Never did I meet
the man with whom I might link myself.’’6 “Liars keep company with liars, and robbers deal with robbers.
The three worlds are full of such persons. There is no one to be trusted.’ Kabir remains a very solitary
person. “In the whole Brabmand (universe), Kabir is the only swan, the rest are crows with open beaks.’
The very significant and important thing is that, in Kabit’s view, maya deliberately entices and
bewitches man on to sinful ways. The world is a phantom play and maya stands between man and God. All
his statements suggest that there is virtually a conspiracy deliberately to lure the simple man into false and evil
ways and to destroy him. Repeatedly, Kabir warns man to escape from the bondage and the destructive
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
tentacles of the world. Kabir has almost contempt for it. Though, at times, Kabir condemns ascetic
methods, but all his above statements show a very strong ascetic bias and an excessive otherworldly approach.
Hence his repeated warnings to others to escape from the grip of maya. Such being the views of Kabir, no
wonder he neither took any step to organise any religious institution, nor evinced any interest in the social
affairs around him. Such views are, indeed, quite akin to those of Sufis. His attitude is almost like the “¢auba’’
of Sufis which involves abstinence, renunciation and solitariness. Like the Sufis, Kabir married, but like them
he remained cut off from the mainstream of life.
(vi) Methodology: Kabir believes in self-surrender and God’s bhakit. The Kabir-panthis follow a life of
singing the praises of God, prayers and a simple and pure life of devotion. Kabir recommends ceaseless
singing of God’s praises.*’ He virtually suggests withdrawal from the world. He is against all ritualistic and
ascetic methods as means to salvation. It is true that Kabir refers to some yogic terms in describing the
meditational and mystic methods of the yogis. But, there is no ground to suggest that he himself
recommends the yogic path. In fact, far from recommending yoga, he is quite strong in condemning ascetic
ot yogic methods, and says that yogis, in their meditations, become prey to maya. The point will, however be
considered further while comparing Radical bhak# with Nathism.
The moral tone is quite strong in Kabir’s hymns. “Kabir deck thyself with garments of love. To
them is given honour whose body and soul speak the truth.’ “The ruby of goodness is greater than all the
mines of rubies, all the wealth of three worlds resides in the goodness of heart. When the wealth of
contentment is won, all other wealth is as dust.’ “Where there is mercy, there is strength, where there is
forgiveness, there is He.” “The man who is kind and practises righteousness, who remains passive in the
affairs of the world, who considers creatures of the world as his own self, he attains the immortal Being; the
true God is ever with him.’’’! Kabir suggests inward worship and remembrance of God. For him, true
worship is only inwards. “Put on the rosary inward. By counting beads, the world will be full of light.’ He
clearly suggests moral discrimination between good and bad deeds. “What can the helpless road do, when the
traveller does not walk understandingly.”’”? “What can one do, if, with lamp in hand, one falls in the well.”
“Or goes astray with open eyes.” “Discern ye now between good and evil.’
Kabir is a firm advocate of abimsa. His doctrine extends even to the non-destruction of flowers.
“The life of the living you strike dead and you say your slaughter makes it dedicated. It is blood haunting you
and those who taught you.”” “They fast all day, and at night they slaughter the cow; here murder, there
devotion; how can this please God ? O’ Kazi, by whose order doth thou use thy knife.””° “When you declare
the sacrifice of an animal as your religion, what else is sin ? If you regard yourself a saint, whom will you call
a butcher >?’ “The goat eats grass and is skinned, what will happen to those who eat (goat’s) meat ?”78 “Do
not kill poor jwa, murder will not be forgiven even if you hear a million Pwranas.’” Among the fifty
commandments laid down for the followers of Kabir, vegetarianism is one of them.®? For Kabir, moral life
involves adherence to ahimsa.
In common with all monastic, ascetic or otherworldly sects, Kabir does not think well of women.
There is almost a tirade against them in the hymns of Kabir. Woman is characterised as “a black cobra”, “the
pit of hell” and the “refuse of the world.”8! She is considered to be a hurdle in the path of the spiritual
progress of man. He spoke, “Woman ruins everything when she comes near a man; Devotion, salvation and
divine knowledge no longer enter his soul.”’8? Schomer and O” Flaherty find a misogynist bias in the hymns of
Kabir.*3 His views, about woman ate also evident from all his vehement attacks against maya. Almost
everywhere he likens maya to a woman who is out to entice and entrap man, and destroy his spiritual life.
Such views about woman from a married person are, indeed, quite uncommon.
(vit) Kabir’s Worldview: The cosmological views of Kabir give a clear clue to his worldview. He finds
Nitanjana to be the creator of the world; maya or woman. And this woman stands between man and God.
She is there to entice him away from Him.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
These views clearly affect Kabir’s stand about the reality of the world and his consequent approach
to it. He finds the world to be a trap, a cleverly laid trap, from which escape has to be sought. This also
explains Kabir’s attitude towards woman, his stress on ahimsa and his strong ascetic bias. All these features,
involving virtual withdrawal from life, are common to all monastic or ascetic religious systems.
Similarly, Kabir’s goal of liberation from maya and union with God as an end in itself, too, is
otherworldly. For, Kabir, after his achievement, never took any initiative either to start a religious
organisation or movement, or to accept any social responsibility. The inequality in the world he seems to
ascribe to one’s own acts. “To one man God has given silks and satin and a niwar bed, others have not even
a ragged coat or straw in the house to lie upon. Indulge not in envy or bickerings, O” my soul, do good deeds
and gain their reward.’’*+ In this background, no wonder, Kabir never took any interest in the social or
temporal affairs of his times. Obviously, such activity was not in line with his system. In the whole Byak,
there is hardly a categoric reference to God’s Will working in the world. No doubt, Kabir calls all men to be
the children of God, but it is equally true that for him the world is far from being a field of spiritual training
and test. There is no direction for, much less emphasis on, carrying out the Will of God. Generally, his
description of God is of one without Attributes and is Absolute. Mystics who are disinclined to enter the
social field generally describe God as Absolute and Attributeless.
Apart from the popular hymns of Kabir, most of them either deal with subjects that are abstract,
esoteric or mystic, or are couched in a language that is seemingly paradoxical. Many of his hymns are in the
form of riddles to be solved. In fact, Kabir is aware of it, because, at the end of some hymns, he invites
petsons to indicate their meaning, saying he who could understand them would be a master of religion.®5 It is
undoubted that Kabir, like the Hinayana, addressed only the elite. His lack of interest in creating a separate
religious movement is also obvious from the fact that he appointed no successor, and after him his disciples
divided into Hindu Kabir-panthis and Muslim Kabir-panthis, each group owing allegiance to its own respective
tradition as well.
Therefore, whether seen from the point of view of his goal, his approach to the world, his ideas
about the reality of the world, his attitude towards women, his insistence on ahimsa and other factors
mentioned above, it is apparent that Kabir holds the world-view of withdrawal from life.
4. NAM DEV
Nam Dev is another pioneer of the Radical bhakti School. Though he appeared a century earlier than
Kabir, his religious and social views are very much like those of Kabir. He unambiguously repudiates all the
four fundamentals of Vaisnavism. Though in his devotional approach, he is clearly a monotheist, he makes
many pantheistic statements too, e.g., every thing is God; there is nothing but God; consider the world and
God to be one; the foam and the water are not different. Chaturvedi writes : “Sant Nam Dev seemed to
believe both in transcendence and immanence, in pantheism and nondualism. His devotion was purely of the
non-attributional absolute.”®° But, he also considers God to be immanent, everywhere, in all hearts, and the
Creator of everything. Like Kabir and the Sufis, Nam Dev is very otherworldly. For, he says, “The strength
of contempt of the world should be in the body an unchanging companion. One should lay aside differences
between oneself and others, and feel no anxiety for things of the world.’’8’ Ranade also writes : “He (Nam
Dey) tells us that it is impossible that the pursuit of God can be coupled with a life of Samsara. If it had been
possible for a man to find God while he was pursuing Samsara, then Sanaka and others would not have grown
mad after God. If it had been possible for him to see God while carrying on the duties of a householder, the
great Suka would not have gone to the forest to seek God. Had it been possible for people to find God in
their homes, they would not have left them to find out. Nam Dev has left all these things, and is approaching
God in utter submission (Abhg. 83).”8®
Nam Dev’s cosmogenic views are also orthodox. He says that God created maya and “maya is the
name of the power that placeth man in the womb.”®? Indirectly, he is neither happy with the world, nor with
the human birth. For him, shop, shopkeeper, men and everything are unreal excepting God. In this
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
(73
background he seeks release from the world and suggests renunciation : “...... Nam Dev gave up trade, and
devoted himself exclusively to the worship of God ......!
The world being a play of maya and not being a worthwhile field of spiritual endeavours, Namdev’s
goal is to have union with God through devotion and singing His praises. He says, “I perform worship, sing
God’s praises and meditate on Him for eight pahar in a day i.e, round the clock. At the same time, he
suggests good conduct and purity of life. For, God created all men alike. Though he holds every person
responsible for his acts, he clearly does not believe in a world rigidly governed by karma. Because he says : If
everything were determined by karma, who created karma originally 2
Nam Dev not only claims union with God, but, like Kabir, also states that more than once God
miraculously intervened on his behalf to reveal Himself to him, or help him. Without doubt, Nam Dev’s
approach remains otherworldly both before and after his achievement. At one time, he even gave up work so
as to remain absorbed in his worship and meditations. He never initiated any religious institution or
movement. His was a solitary search for God, without creating any social or religious organisation.
We find that in his repudiation of Vaisnava doctrines, in his metaphysical ideas, methodology and
goal, and more particularly in his otherworldly approach to the world and society, Namdev’s views ate quite
identical with those of Kabir.
5. GENERAL
We have considered the doctrines and thoughts of two pioneers who are distinctly typical of the
Radical School. Other saints like Pipa, Dhanna, Ravidass, Tuka Ram, Trilochan, too, have similar views both
in regard to Vaisnavism, the mode and ideals of bhakt# and their approach to the world. Almost all of them
claim union with God and are guided purely by their individual mystic experience which is their final
authority. All these saints, many of whom belonged to the low castes, accepted the fatherhood of God and
the brotherhood of man. They believed in the heart-whole love of God and moral living, shorn of all
formalism and ritualism.
6. WORLDVIEW OF RADICAL BHAGATS
From the above description, let us draw some general conclusions about them. While, as seen by us,
they are radically different from the Vaisnava Bhaktas, they are, as a class, equally distinct from the Sikh
Gurus.
From the metaphysical point of view, Radical bhakti is theistic, though the theistic picture is a little
blurred, because at times pantheistic statements have also been made by the Bhagats. It cannot be denied that
both in regard to their theism and the reality of the world their views are, to an extent, ambiguous. It is
necessary to understand that ambiguities on these two issues are almost common to all quietist mystics,
including Christian and Buddhist mystics and the Sufis, with which group they are nearest in their doctrines
and practices. Pantheistic systems generally have two features. Their worldview is life-denying, and the
moral tone is weak since everything is the working of the Basic Reality. Man being a part of Reality, the goal
is a return to the original state, God head or Brahman which is Attributeless or Nirgwn. In the Radical bhaki,
the moral sense is clear enough to denounce the inequalities of caste, but it is not strong enough to fight its
logical challenges. So, the pantheistic streak in Radical bhak# does make it indifferent to social interests and
functioning.
In addition, the Radical Bhagats have two other characteristic features. Everyone of these saints had
a clear otherworldly attitude. Secondly, none of them accepted any social responsibility or started a
movement, institution, or organisation in the religious field, much less in the social field. Ranade writes,
“Mystics of this period show an all-absorbing love of God, which would not allow a rightful performance of
one’s duties before God-absorption.” “The conflict between a rightful performance of duty and all absorbing
love of God has existed at all times and in all countries. But it seems the saints of this period were inclined to
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
lean in the latter rather than in the former direction and exhibited an all-absorbing character of God-
realisation. God indeed is an all-devourer, and it seems from the examples of these saints that He devours
also the performance of one’s own natural duties.”°* Let us also quote a few relevant conclusions of Ray
which he expressed regarding the radical saints, “I do not find any evidence to indicate that any of them ever
attempted to institutionalise their faith and followers.” “They had no other social purpose in view than to
make better individuals from out of the groups that assembled around them. Their aim seems to have been
the individual, not the society in any significant sense.” “These leaders seem to have been individuals,
working out for their own problems and towards achieving their personal religious and spiritual aims and
aspirations.”
It is, indeed, a glaring fact that the saints of the Radical School felt no social interest or concern for
the affairs of man. There is no evidence whatsoever, that any of these saints initiated an activity or step in the
social field. Like all quietist mystics, they led a solitary and otherworldly life, because it was their firm belief
that temporal life was inconsistent with the religious path.
All this evidence makes it plain that the worldview of the Radical group was virtually of life-negation,
since all of them led and recommended a life of withdrawal from the world and unconcern with the society in
general. For them, religious life was only a matter of personal concern and pursuit for union with God.
7. SAINTS AND NATHS
Let us examine if there is any affinity between Saints and Naths. Kabir is severely critical of most of
the Nath practices and injunctions. He says, “With shaven head you sit swollen with pride, rings in your ears,
within a cave, your body you have besmeared with ashes, but within, you rob the house. In your village
dwells a proud mendicant, filled with self, with pride and lust.” Naths are Saivites and Machhindernath and
Gorakhnath are the founder Naths or the Nath Gurus. Kabir derides all of them. He rejected the ritualism,
spells, blood sacrifices and horrid practices of Naths as inconsistent with his simple spiritual methods. “I was
inclined neither towards yoga nor towards Dhyana, but I am certain that by Wazragya (renunciation) maya cannot
be discarded.”*” “Brahma, Shiva and Sanaka know Him not. Recite the name of Ram.”°8 Two points need to
be kept in view in interpreting hymns of Kabir. When he refers to some of the yogic methods of meditation,
it does not mean that he accepts their adoption or system. He only means that the achievements claimed by
the yogis are achieved by him by his own methods of bhaki#z. “I have smashed Shiva and Shakti and have
enlightened my soul with Sabaj of the thousand petalled Kamal”? This hymn is clearly derisive of Lord Shiva
who is the god with whom the Nath seeks final union of bliss. Secondly, in many cases, the meaning of
words used by Kabir is his own. With Naths, Sahaj means only a righteous temperament. Naths also used
this term quite differently from its use by Szddbas, with whom Sahaj indicates natural abstinence and the
medium through which they experience Maha-Sukha. But, for Kabir Sabaj means the final state of union with
God through his own devotional systems.!° So, this caution is necessary while interpreting Kabir.
Kabir not only criticises all ascetic life, methodology and practices, but he almost ridicules Shiva, the
Lord of Naths, Machhindernath and Gorakhnath, the two pioneers of the system. “Mahadev wasted his life
with Uma.” “Dead are Gorakh, Dattatreya.” “Many Siddhs, Sanyasis and Gorakh found not the end.”
“Brahma, Shiva and Sanaka know Him not.” “There was no Mahadeva.” “Gorakh could not retain the
breath for all his vaunted devices of devotion. By multiplying their mystic rites and ceremonies, they did not
know Parbrahma.” “Machhindernath was overwhelmed by maya.’’!!
In fact, Nam Dev is quite categoric in rejecting the Hath Yoga method of Naths, when he says that
he follows the path of Nam and disregards the yoga of Ida, Pingla and Susmana. “J shall sing and imbibe the
Name of God and achieve the highest stage; I reject the methods of Ida, Pingla and Susmana, and of the union
of the sun and the moon (as in Hath Yoga where the sun represents Shiva and the moon Kundalani); I shall
reach Him otherwise.”!
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
It would, indeed, be idle to suggest that mystics who reject the Nath methodology and who are quite
derisive while describing their chief god, the pioneers or the gurus of the Naths, would in practice own or
follow Hath Yoga or their system of methodology.
SIKHISM AND RADICAL BHAGATS : A COMPARISON
The common point between Sikhism and the sans is their theism. It cannot be denied that, despite
some of their pantheistic statements, the sants are, broadly speaking, theistic. In their rejection of the
fundamentals of Hinduism and their denouncement of the caste ideology of the Brahminical society, the two
systems, ate quite similar. But, divergences start in regard to most of the remaining issues raised by us. The
overall worldviews presented by the two systems are wholly different.
The views of the sants about the reality of the world are somewhat ambivalent. The san/s clearly led a
life of withdrawal from the world and non-involvement in its affairs. For the Gurus, activity in the world is
the measure of one’s spiritual progress. For Kabir, the world is a snare. But, for the Gurus, “The world is in
bloom like a garden.” For them, rejecting the world and its responsibilities is wrong, because it is the
meaningful field of spiritual training. Activity therein alone shows whether or not a person has shed his ego.
Between the two systems, there is a fundamental contrast in their approach to the world. This basic
difference explains the contrast in the goals, in the methodologies, in the roles of the superman, and the
wotldviews of the two systems.
Whereas among the sants, the goal is to have union with God as an end in itself, in Sikhism, the
gurmukh’ objective is to carry out the Attributive Will of God in the world. In Sikhism, man’s assessment and
his nearness to God depend on the deeds of the seeker. But, in the sav¢t methodology, the emphasis is on
singing the praises and love of God. Among the sants, there has never been any social concern, much less
social involvement in the problems of the community and humanity, since withdrawal from the mainstream
of society is a part of their methodology. As against it, in Sikhism, since God is the Protector of the weak and
the helpless, and Destroyer of the tyrant, the God-conscious person has a perpetual role to play in all fields of
life. The result of all these differences is that, whereas the Sikh worldview is life-affirming, that of the sants is
life-denying. Let us explain this point about life-affirmation or activity.
In this context, it is fundamentally important to bear in mind how this thesis of life-affirmation and
activity was lived, what was its impact on society, and how it flowered. Guru Nanak’s very first words, after
his Enlightenment were, “There is no Hindu, no Mussalman.” For, without any distinction of creed or
colour, he saw only man everywhere, and his primary interest was in man alone. Of this principle of the
brotherhood of man, Gupta writes, “Like Rousseau, Nanak felt 250 years earlier that it was the common
people who make the human race.” The marvel is that this principle was proclaimed and practised in a
society, where, for over two thousand years, the divisive rigidity of the hierarchical caste had not only been
strictly observed, but the same had also received complete religious, ethical and social sanction. In
furtherance of their thesis, the Gurus purposely organised and created an egalitarian society outside the social
system governed by the caste ideology. No other religious or liberal movement, whether Buddhistic,
Vaisnava, Saiva or of the Radical Bhagat, ever made an attempt in this direction; much less organise it. This
calculated organisation and socio-political direction of the movement inevitably led to a clash with the
establishment and the martyrdoms of the Gurus themselves and hundreds of their followers. For the first
time in history, there arose an idealistic revolution, a pleople’s movement constituted by all sections of
society, but led by the so-called lowest of them, including Kalals, Sudras and Ranghrettas. The deep significance
of these features and the ethos that gave rise to them can be gauged from the fact that in 1947 when India
won independence, the Prime Minister and the Chief Ministers of practically all the states belonged to the
Brahmin caste. Again, the elan of this movement was such that it not only suffered and survived persistent
attempts of the Moghul Empire to exterminate it, even by placing a price on the head of every Sikh, but it
actually supplanted the very Empire that sought to uproot and destroy it. No wonder, Dr Gupta calls this
saga of martyrdoms, sacrifices and a successful struggle nothing short of a miracle. It is of this revolution
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
that he says, “He (the Guru) thus enunciated a hundred years earlier the principles of liberty, equality and
fraternity which formed the bedrock of the French Revolution.”
A question arises why there is such a contrast between the essentials and the activities of the two
systems when both of them are theistic. This point takes us back to the issue raised by us initially, namely,
the unity of perception, ideology and activity. In that regard, we came to the conclusion that the best clues to
the ideology and basic perceptions of a religious system are its activities. Otherwise, simplistic or merely
academic definition or classification of a religious system could be very misleading. Quietist mystic systems
ot theistic saints like the sants have appeared in all times and in different countries. And, yet, none of them
have ever shown social concern and responsibility as did the Sikh Gurus. It would, therefore, be very wrong
to class both the activist and the quietist mystics in the same category, or to assert that the ideologies and
perceptions of these two kinds of saints are the same, even though their activities in life are wholly divergent.
The answers of the sants and the Sikh Gurus regarding most of the essentials of their religions being
different, evidently the religious perceptions and experiences of the sants and the Gurus are different. For
obvious reasons, evidence on this issue can, by and large, be only inferential. However, before we examine
this issue further, we shall consider the views of two mystics on this matter.
Abdul Qadus of Gangoh, while referring to the active role of Prophet Mohammad, said,
“Mohammad of Arabia ascended the highest heaven and returned. I swear by God that if I had reached that
point I should never have returned.”!
It is no mere coincidence that centuries later, Baba Wasakha Singh, a Sikh saint, emphasised the same
point saying, “What kind of bhak# is that in which one remains absorbed in one’s meditations and the poor
suffer all around us. This is not bhakt. A Guru’s Sikh must work and serve the poor.”!4 In Sikhism, the
highest stage is not to remain enthralled in the mystic union, but, simultaneously, to work for the welfare of
suffering humanity.” The same point he stressed in different words, “You know how difficult it is for an
ordinary person to give up the worldly pleasures and possessions and instead to follow the path of God. It is
even more difficult for the bhagat to come out of his intense and tranquil bliss in order to serve man and do
the Will of God. But, brother, it is the highest kind of bhaki# to serve the poor and the downtrodden and yet
remain in union with Him.”!%
Bergson, who has considered the issue from the point of view of philosophy, goes to the extent of
saying that the religious experience of the quietist mystics, like Plotinus or Buddhists, is not full-fledged.
According to him, complete mysticism inevitably involves “the establishment of a contact, consequently of a
partial coincidence, with the creative effort which life itself manifests. This effort is of God, if it is not God
Himself. The great mystic is to be conceived as an individual being, capable of transcending the limitations
imposed on the species by its material nature, thus continuing and extending the divine action.” He,
therefore, considers Greek, Indian and Buddhist mysticisms to be incomplete, because these give up activity.
Plotinus, the Greek mystic, says that, “action is a weakening of contemplation.” But, in complete mysticism,
after the union, the mystic soul yearns to become His (God’s) instrument. “Now it is God who is acting
through the soul.” The mystic is all activity. It is not now “the love of man for God, it is the love of God for
all men” that works. It is this love which the mystic expresses in life. It coincides with “God’s love for his
handiwork.” These mystics are the instruments of God so as to “lift humanity up to God and complete the
divine creation so that it could reach its end.” To such a God-conscious man, the creation appears to be
“God undertaking to create creators, so that he may have besides Himself, beings worthy of His love.’’!°6 The
views of Hocking too are very similar. For him also, a bhagat of the active kind “not only establishes a
communion with God and develops a higher spiritual consciousness, but also becomes, in the domain of life
the divine organising vehicle of the Transcendent Reality. In all humility, he seeks to translate into activity
the Will of God. This forms his continuing mission.”!°’ Such has been the perpetual, creative, constructive,
and organising role of the Sikh Gurus.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Centuries before Bergson and Hocking defined activity or prophetic devotion to God and
distinguished it from quietist devotion, the Sikh Gurus had not only clearly and emphatically expressed their
views on the subject of their prophetic or activity religion, but they had actually lived according to the
principles of active bhakti laid down by them.
Another question arises as to why there should be such vast difference in the ideology and the
activities of the two kinds of devotees or bhagats of God. These differences, we feel, are entirely due to the
difference in the perceptions of the two kinds of saints. Stace has collected a mass of evidence about the
nature of the religious experiences of numerous mystics and saints of the world, including those from India,
the Middle East, Europe, England and Greece. He describes this experience as unitary, ineffable, paradoxical,
blessed, blissful and tranquil. The entire evidence Stace has collected, relates to saints who in their lives were
quietists. In his description, Stace does not mention love as being an element in the religious perceptions of
those saints or mystics.!08 Like Stace, William James had also recorded the nature of religious experiences. He
too does not mention love to be an essential part of that experience.
But Bergson considers love to be the chief ingredient of the mystic experience of the activity mystics.
Let us see what the Guru says in this regard. “Friends, ask me what is the chief mark of the Lord. He is all
Love, rest He is ineffable.’’!°? For the Guru, the fundamental feature of the religious experience is love. That
is why Guru Nanak says, “He who wants to play the game of love should come with his head on his palm’’,!!
and Guru Gobind Singh declared, “Let everyone know that he alone is approved by the Lord who loves.”!"!
And love is dynamic, creative, cohesive, directive and virtuous. Such is also the Attributive Will of God. The
Gutu says, “He who knows His Will, carry it out.”
In Sikhism, both the seeker and the bhagat have to live the life of continuous activity for the service
of man. With the quietist bhagats, the position is entirely different both in theory and practice. Hence the
wide differences between the two systems, their religious perceptions and their activities.
REFERENCES
Ahmed Shah, Bijak of Kabir, p. 111.
Ibid., pp. 147-148.
Machwe, P., Kabir, p. 33.
Ahmad Shah, op. cit. p. 220.
Ibid., p. 117.
Varma, R.K., Kabir Biography and Philosophy, p. 37.
Ibid., p. 37.
Ahmad Shah, op. cit. p. 69.
9. Varma, op. cit. p. 7.
10. Ahmad Shah, op. cit. pp. 88, 220.
11. Ibid., pp. 105-6.
12. Ibid., p. 138.
13. Ibid., pp. 103-104; Juergensmeyer, M., Sikb Studies, p. 70.
14. Ibid., p. 175.
15. Ibid., p. 174.
16. Ibid., p. 149.
17. Ibid., pp. 60, 104.
18. Ibid., p. 82, Gara Granth Sahib, p. 324.
19. Ibid., p. 116.
20. Ahmad Shah, op. cit. pp. 147-149.
21. Ibid., pp. 95, 158.
00; SEG Ot Oo, Na
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
22. Ibid., pp. 209-210.
23. Ibid., p. 114.
24. Wilson, H.H., Religious Sects of the Hindus, p. 19.
25. Tara Chand, Influence of Islam on Indian Culture, p. 148.
26. Varma, op. cit. p. 22.
27. Ibid., pp. 19, 50.
28. Machwe, op. cit. p. 19, Bhandarkar, R.G., Vaisnavism and Saivism, p. 69.
29. Ahmad Shah, op. cit. pp. 41-42.
30. Ibid., pp. 41-43.
31. Ibid., p. 7.
32. Tara Chand, Influence of Islam on Indian Culture, p. 154.
33. Machwe, op. cit. p. 23; Varma, op. cit. p. 94; Ahmad Shah, op. cit. pp. 58, 68.
34. Tara Chand, op. cit. p. 154; Machwe, p. 24.
35. Varma, op. cit. p. 94.
36. Ibid., p. 118.
37. Ibid., p. 118.
38. Bhandarkar, op. cit. p. 71.
39. Macauliffe, The Sikh Religion, Vol. 6, p. 160; Tara Chand, op. cit. p. 150.
40. Varma, op. cit. p. 118.
41. Tara Chand, op. cit. pp. 161-162.
42. Ahmad Shah, op. cit. p. 37.
43. Ibid., pp. 38, 81.
44, Ibid., p. 132.
45. Ibid., p. 163.
46. Ibid., p. 163.
47. Macauliffe, op. cit. Vol. 6, p. 199.
48. Ahmad Shah, op. cit. p. 111.
49. Ibid., pp. 41-42.
50. Ibid., pp. 38-43. 63.
51. Ibid., p. 52.
52. Ibid., pp. 87, 96-97.
53. Ibid., pp. 148-149.
54. Ibid., p. 63.
55. Ibid., p. 96.
56. Ibid., p. 174.
57. Ibid., p. 174.
58. Ibid., p. 165.
59. Ibid., pp. 166-167.
60. Ibid., p. 170.
61. Ibid., pp. 170-175.
62. Ibid., p. 186.
63. Ibid., p. 216.
64. Ibid., p. 216.
65. Ibid., p. 136.
67. Bhandarkar, op. cit. p. 73.
68. Ahmad Shah, op. cit. p. 200.
69. Ibid., p. 225.
70. Ibid., p. 225.
71. Tara Chand, op. cit. p. 160.
72. Ibid., p. 202; Guru Granth Sahib, p. 1376.
73. Macauliffe, op. cit. Vol. 6, p. 141.
74. Ibid., p. 179.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
75. Ahmad Shah, op. cit. pp. 134-135.
76. Ibid., p. 71.
77. Varma, op. cit. p. 31.
79. Ahmad Shah, op. cit. p. 204.
80. Ibid., p. 44.
81. Juergensmeyer, op. cit. p. 83.
82. Ibid., p. 84.
83. Ibid., pp. 83-88.
84. Macauliffe, op. cit. Vol. 6, p. 204.
85. Ahmad Shah, op. cit. p. 144, Varma, p. 122.
86. Machwe, P., Namdev, p. 61.
87. Macauliffe, op. cit. Vol. 6, p. 27.
88. Machwe, op. cit. pp. 74-75.
89. Macauliffe, op. cit. Vol. 6, p. 48.
90. Ibid., p. 75.
91. Ibid., p. 65.
92. Ibid., p. 43.
93. Ibid., p. 60.
94. Machwe, pp. 59-60.
95. Ray, N., The Sikh Gurus and the Sikh Society, pp. 61-62.
96. Ahmad Shah, op. cit. p. 164.
97. Varma, op. cit. p. 73.
98. Juergensmeyer, op. cit. p. 70.
99. Varma, op. cit. pp. 43-44.
100. Ibid., pp. 55-56.
101. Ahmad Shah, op. cit. pp. 78-79, 104, 138-140.
102. Guru Granth Sahib, pp. 972-973.
103. Iqbal, M., Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam, pp. 124, 197-98.
104. Daljit Singh, SiAhism, p. 298.
105. Ibid., p. 297.
106. Smullyan and others, Introduction to Philosophy, pp. 363-66.
107. Spencer, S., Mysticism in World Religions, p. 173.
108. Stace, W.T., Mysticism and Philosophy, pp. 131-133.
109. Guru Granth Sahib, p. 459.
110. Ibid., p. 1412.
111. Swayyas Patshahi Das (Tenth Guru).
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
17
THE KHALSA
JAGJIT SINGH
One of the objectives of the Sikh movement was to capture political power for a plebeian mission.
The Khalsa was the instrument created and used both to overthrow the Mughal, and to capture political
power for achieving plebeian objectives. The significance of the Khalsa, and the role it played in the
revolutionary struggle, are of the highest importance, because the Khalsa was the climax of the Sikh
movement.
1. REVOLUTIONARY MISSION ENSHRINED
Describing the attributes of God, Guru Gobind Singh says, “Thou bestowest happiness on the good,
Thou terrifiest the evil, Thou scatterest sinners, I seek Thy protection.”! “God ever cherisheth the poor;
saveth saints, and destroyeth enemies.” He speaks of God as “Compassionate to the poor, and Cherisher of
the lowly.”? Guru Nanak also identifies himself with “lowliest of the lowly, the lowest of the low-born ......
for, where the weak are cared for, Thy Mercy is showered.”* Thus, ‘cherishing the poor’ and “destroying the
tyrant’ are, according to Sikhism, God’s own mission. In the Guru’s own words, “his father (Guru Tegh
Bahadur) suffered martyrdom for the sake of religion.” It was in the pursuance of His mission that God sent
Guru Gobind Singh to this world. In the Guru’s own words the mission was :
“Go and spread my religion there,
And restrain the world from senseless acts.’
Guru Gobind Singh bestowed sovereignty on the Khalsa for plebeian objectives. This was how this
Sikh revolutionary mission was consecrated. It was God’s own mission.
2. WAHEGURU JI KA KHALSA
Waheguru ji ka Khatsa;
Waheguru ji ki Fateh.
It means, “The Khalsa belongs to God, and so does Victory belong to Him.’ When Guru Gobind
Singh conferred leadership on the Khalsa, he ended his address with this expression. It became a motto of
the Khalsa. It is repeated on all occasions and ceremonies, especially the amwrit ceremony, and as a form of
daily greetings among Sikhs. Guru Nanak had told Daulat Khan Lodhi that he recognised no other authority
than that of God. Guru Arjun had declared, ‘I am a worshipper of the Immortal God ...... There is no
monarch save Him.’ Guru Gobind Singh said in his hymn : ‘Since I embraced Thy Feet, I have paid regard
to none besides.’> The same lesson was impressed on the mind of the Khalsa by the repeated expression of
the above motto. The Khalsa owed allegiance to God, and to none else. In its social implications, it meant
loyalty only to the Khalsa mission which had been sanctified by God Himself. Forster narrates a personal
experience. Once he travelled in the company of a Sikh horseman for some days. ‘His answer, when I asked
him very respectfully in whose service he was retained, seemed strikingly characteristic of what I conceive to
be the disposition of the Nation. He said, in a tone of voice, and with a countenance which glowed and was
keenly animated by the warm spirit of liberty and independence, that he disclaimed an earthly master, and he
was the servant only of his Prophet.’6 This is a glimpse of the Khalsa spirit as it had survived even in the
post-revolutionary period. This motto also generated a spirit of everlasting optimism and humility —
optimism because the revolutionary cause, being God’s cause, was bound to succeed sooner or later; and
humility because all victory was God’s Victory and by His Grace. It involved no credit for the participant.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
3. OPEN DECLARATION OF REVOLUTION
When the head of Guru Tegh Bahadur was brought to Guru Gobind Singh at Anandpur, he asked,
how many Sikhs had sacrificed themselves along with the Guru ? He was told that only two Sikhs sacrificed
themselves. The Guru remarked, ‘But the Sikhs are many in number ?’ The answer given was, ‘All turned
their back to the faith. All slipped back in the populace. There was no distinguishing mark for a Sikh to
prevent that from happening.’ This provoked the Guru to say, ‘I shall assign such distinguishing marks to
the Sikhs that a Sikh would be recognizable even among thousands.”’ Guru Gobind Singh proceeded to
create the Khalsa, an armed body of revolutionaries, who were to carry out the revolution ‘by the open
profession thereof.’ On being initiated as a member of the Khalsa, a Sikh become a Singh (male) or Kaur
(female). A Singh or Kaur has to carry fixed distinguishing marks, especially hair, which he/she cannot
discard, so long as he/she want to remain a Singh or Kaur. So he/she is recognizable even among thousands,
by friends and foes alike. Thus, each and every Singh or Kaur is made not only an instrument of the declared
revolution, but also its standard bearer.
It was in 1675 A.D. that the Guru expressed his intention of assigning distinguishing marks to the
Sikhs. He gave it a practical shape by creating the Khalsa in 1699, 24 years later. This shows a long-term
plan and preparation. Guru Hargobind’s battles had not been in vain. These inspired ‘the Sikhs with self-
confidence, and gave them an exalted sense of their own worth.’ Guru Har Rai and Guru Tegh Bahadur had
kept regular forces, but that remained primarily a period of truce. And, there was now a radical change in the
political situation. Aurangzeb confronted non-Muslims with an undisguised religious and political challenge.
He started undermining even the position of his loyal Rajput allies. This challenge could be met only by a
direct confrontation and by pitching against the power of the state the power of the masses. Guru Gobind
Singh, therefore, made an open declaration of revolution and started arming the general body of the Panth”™
with a view to creating a large force of revolutionaries. As Bhangu has rightly put it, the Guru ‘first increased
the number of the Khalsa, and then started the revolution.”®
4. KHALSA AS AN INSTRUMENT OF REVOLUTION
Guru Gobind Singh invited the hill Rajas to join him in his struggle against the Mughals. For a short
time, he even succeeded in persuading some of them to make common cause against the Mughal rulers. But,
the attitude of the hill chiefs was not consistent. They were guided primarily by their feudal interests and
made war or peace with the Mughals accordingly. Another basic point of difference was that they were
governed by caste considerations. When invited by the Guru, they refused even to entertain the idea of
working side by side with the so-called low caste followers of the Guru. Had the Guru been guided by the
consideration of only meeting the Mughal challenge, he might have come to terms with the hill Rajas. But he
did not. This is very significant. His basic objective was to raise the level of the poor and the downtrodden.
He wanted these very people to capture political power for themselves. For that end, the Guru had to
embark upon his project from humble beginnings. He made atrows with his own hands? and trained people
who had been denied the use of arms by the caste ideology. He did not follow the easier course of depending
upon the hill chiefs who had arms and martial tradition. For, this would have been at the cost of his
fundamental religious and social principles and objectives.
Guru Gobind Singh gathered together the Sikhs and gave them the call, “Take up arms and defeat the
Turks (Mughals).’ He devised the plan for initiation of the Khalsa. On the annual Vaisakhi gathering of the
Sikhs, the Guru came out of a tent with a drawn sword in his hand and demanded from the congregation the
head of a Sikh for sacrifice. There was great consternation, but one Sikh got up and offered himself to the
Guru. The Guru took him inside the tent. Soon after he came out with a blood-stained sword in his hand
and again demanded a second head. This time the consternation was greater than before, but undaunted,
another Sikh offered himself. Five times the Guru made the same demand. Every time a Sikh offered
himself. This showed that the community had attained the level at which it was ready to stake its all for the
cause. Finally, the Guru brought out from the tent the Panj Piaras (Five Beloved Ones), hale and hearty. First
he initiated them and then got himself initiated by them. Thus was created the Khalsa, ready for the mission.
The Guru said :
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
‘They will destroy the (established tyrannical) rule,
And establish their own everywhete ......
Khalsa will become the image of God,
With His own attributes.
They will acknowledge no authority,
Other than that of the True Lord.”!°
Gursobha testifies that “The Khalsa is created to destroy the evil-doer (aswr’ and ‘durjan’)."' Koer
Singh writes that after the initiation ceremony, the Guru gave instructions to the following effect :
‘Destroy the Mughal forces ...... (and you) rule for ever.’!?
Later Sikh literature records the same tradition. ‘Khalsa is one who fights in the front line ......
Khalsa is one who protects the poot ...... Khalsa is one who crushes the tyrant (dushal).’!3 “Where the (Singhs)
fight the Turks for upholding dharma and the Sikh ideals and to help others, there my presence will be felt
among the Sikhs.’!4 ‘Khalsa is the army of God.’5 It was ordered : “You should now wear weapons, and
value steel; and love it, because this will lead you to a high status.”!
Guru Gobind Singh addressed his two sons at the battle of Chamkaur thus : ‘My sons, you are dear
to me. You are born to destroy the Turks (tyrants). Only if you sacrifice yourselves in the battle, can the
tyrants be eliminated. There can be no better opportunity than the present one. Both of you go and join the
battle.” And, when his eldest son died fighting there, the Guru said, “Today he has become the chosen
Khalsa in God’s court.’!’? Thus, to sacrifice oneself for the revolutionary cause was the fulfilment of the
Khalsa ideal and it was sanctified by the religion.
The acceptance of the Khalsa ideology naturally meant becoming whole time revolutionaries. An
important part of the Sikh discipline was the dedication of one’s all — body, soul and belongings (¢an, man,
dhan,) — to the Guru or God. “By dedicating body, mind and possessions to the Guru, and abiding by His
Will does one reach God.””” This ideal demanded extreme self-sacrifice. The Guru said, “As the elephant
suffers the goad, and the anvil the stroke of the smith, so should one surrender one’s body and mind to the
setvice (of God).”!° When Banda expressed his desire to become a disciple of Guru Gobind Singh, the Guru
cautioned him that in order to become a Sikh, he would have to surrender and stake everything for the
mission.”20 To regard one’s body and possessions as belonging to the Guru or God was the Sikh way of
creating a commune. With the militarization of the Sikh movement, this ideal was orientated towards
dedication of one’s all to the revolutionary cause. The Khalsa is God’s own (Waheguru ji ka Khalsa).
Therefore, dedication of oneself to the Khalsa was dedication to God. A Sikh’s dedication of body, soul and
possessions to the Khalsa has to be complete. Guru Gobind Singh has himself made this point explicit. “All
the wealth of my house with soul and body is for them (Khalsa).’’2! “Khalsa is my own image; I abide in the
Khalsa; Khalsa is my body and life; Khalsa is the life of my life; I belong to the Khalsa and the Khalsa
belongs to me; the way the ocean and the drop are one.’
Thousands of Sikhs lived upto this standard. Even at a very late stage of the struggle, those who
joined the Khalsa Dal (an organisation of combatant volunteers) had, according to the demands of the
mission, to cut off virtually all their connections with their families. Those, who without permission, visited
their families even for some urgent reason, had to pay the prescribed penalty. When the Khalsa Dal was
reorganised into five divisions (/athas), one of these divisions was of shaheeds, viz., those who had dedicated
themselves completely to the revolutionary cause and vowed not to shirk martyrdom, when necessary. The
Nihangs and Akalis were quite sizeable in numbers and played a notable part in Sikh history. Nebangs and
Akalis, like the shaheeds, were those volunteers who had dedicated their lives to the armed service of the
Panth. Maybe, they were a part or an offshoot of the shaheeds. They cut off for life all worldly connections,
spent their entire lives in the ja/bas, remained always armed to the teeth and were ever ready to lay down their
lives for the Panth. They were to the Sikhs what the Jannessears were to the Turks, with the difference that the
Nihangs and Akalis were honorary volunteers and not organised or paid by the state. The Nebangs were a
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
dedicated and inspired lot, highly conscious of the Sikh mission and its revolutionary ideals. Theirs was an
armed commune and continues to be so to this day. In other words, they institutionalized the ideal of
dedicating ‘tan, man, dha’ to the Sikh revolutionary cause. It is for this reason that they are held in high
esteem in the Panth. They were at one time its conscience keepers. When the movement entered its lean
period and split up into different fighting corporations (wisls), one of the mis/s was of the shaheeds. They held
no territory of their own and were provided food and shelter by the Panth. The Shaheeds and Akalis provided
the rallying point for the s/s to co-ordinate in order to meet a common danger to the Panth. At such a time,
the resolution (gurmatta) to meet such an eventuality (e.g. at the time of threatened danger from Abdali’s
invasion) would be sponsored by the Akalis. All the mis/s would honour the resolution.4 Even Ranjit Singh
respected them and was afraid of offending the Akals. They were the dominating factor in the Khalsa army
committees.*** Scott compares the Akafis with Cromwell’s Ironsides. “The Akals would represent the ‘Fifth
Monarchy Men’, stern and uncompromising, firmly believing in the righteousness of their cause, insisting on
the right to equality for all, guided by the decisions of the Panch, or Committee of Five, than by their nominal
leaders, and watching those leaders with the jealous eyes lest they should assume absolute power.’
5. AS CUSTODIAN OF ETHICAL VALUES
The Sikh movement, as already pointed out, had a twofold objective. It aimed at raising man above
his ego-centredness and thus produce an ideal man, and it wanted to change the social and political
environment which hindered such development. Guru Gobind Singh, no doubt, bestowed political
sovereignty on the Khalsa, but it was to be the Khalsa of his definition. The Guru had said that ‘Khalsa was
his own image ...... his perfect Guru.’ Accordingly, great emphasis was laid on the maintenance of the ethical
standards set for the Khalsa. ‘He who shuns the company of the five evils, loves to associate with noble men,
owns dharma and compassion, gives up ambition; ...... He is the Khalsa of the Wabeguru.2? One day before his
death, when the Sikhs asked Guru Gobind Singh as to who was to be his successor, he replied :
‘Khalsa is my image, I abide in the Khalsa;
From beginning to end, I reveal myself in the Khalsa.’
Bhai Nand Lal, a close associate of Guru Gobind Singh, writes :
‘Khalsa is one who does not speak ill of others;
Khalsa is one who fights in the front ranks.
Khalsa is one who conquers the five evils;
Khalsa is one who destroys doubt.
Khalsa is one who gives up ego;
Khalsa is one who keeps away from woman, not his wife;
Khalsa is one who looks upon all as his own;
Khalsa is one who attunes himself with God.’
In the Rabitnama of Bhai Prahlad Singh, it is written, ‘He who lives up to the Sikh ideals, he alone is
my Sikh.’3° Guru Gobind Singh’s uncle Kirpal Singh and some other leading Sikhs expressed their concern to
the Guru that it would not be possible to maintain the sense of discrimination between good and evil in the
revolutionary struggle he wanted to initiate. And, if that discrimination is lost, the Sikh ideals would be
nowhere. The Guru’s reply was that the true Sikhs would not lose that discrimination; only those would go
astray who join the revolution from ulterior motives.*! In fact, in the literature of the revolutionary period,
there is great emphasis on the observance of ethical values by the Khalsa. For his overall development, the
Sikh was asked both to maintain the highest moral standards and to faithfully pursue the socio-political
objectives of the Khalsa.
Sikhism regards haumain (ego or individualism) as the greatest human failing. It is this which leads to
acts of encroachment and aggression. It is for this reason that they have laid great stress on the elimination
of individualism. The Sikh ideal is : “Neither frighten anyone, nor fear anyone.’ “The garmukh is powerful,
yet humble in spirit’°? The sublimation of ego was not only a theological ideal, but also a social ideal of
Sikhism.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
The Gurus had all along been identifying themselves with Sikhs or the Sikh Panth. The Tenth Guru
made it clear that the corporate movement was of greater significance than any individual, howsoever highly
placed he may be. All his achievements, he says, he owed to the Khalsa. “Through their favour I am exalted,
otherwise, there are millions of lowly men like me.”34
When the so-called Nawabi was offered to Kapur Singh, a humble person who did service at the daily
gatherings, he said he would accept it only after it was touched to the feet of five Singhs.*> This episode leads
to four inferences. That honour was considered by the Khalsa as the reward of humble service. This was the
reason for selecting Kapur Singh. Secondly, there was, till then, no craving for personal power. That is why
Nawabi was acceptable to no one and had to be imposed by the Khalsa on an unwilling Kapur Singh. Thirdly,
the objective was not personal power (Nawabi), but to be a humble servant of the Khalsa, from which
everyone drew his strength. Fourthly, it showed that all power vested in the corporate body, the Khalsa.
When the first mud fort of the Khalsa was built, ‘the Singhs were their own brick-layers and labourers; (they)
themselves ground corn and prepared food; the more one served, the bigger he grew as a leader. Whosoever
put in more labour, blessed was the life of that Singh. It was said that nobody bore ill will to another; nobody
gave air to his personal difficulties.’
6. COMPLETE BREAK WITH THE SOCIAL PAST
It was the basic inequality of the caste society that the Gurus wanted to eradicate. However, the sole
recruiting ground for the Sikh movement was the caste society. The Gurus had hitherto furthered the
objectives of their movement in a cautious manner so as not to break this life-line. But, the Khalsa had to be
the instrument of capturing political power for a plebeian mission. It was, therefore, necessary that the
membership of the Khalsa be restricted to those who were not only alive to the objectives of the movement,
but were also willing to make major sacrifices for it. At the time of the initiation, each entrant to the
brotherhood of the Khalsa gained five freedoms; freedom from the shackles of (a) earlier religions, (b) earlier
deeds (Raram), (c) caste, clan and race, (d) earlier taboos and customs, and (e) superstitions, rituals, etc.*°
These freedoms ensured the complete severence of the Khalsa from the caste society. Those who were
baptised into the Khalsa were also said to be reborn. But, unlike the Upananya ceremony, they were not tre-
born into Aryan-hood. They were reborn because, by being baptised, they shed off all stigmas attached to
them or their status by the caste society. Not only that; there became a clear distinction between Singhs and
Sikhs. Those Sikhs who did not become Singhs, i.e., did not join the Khalsa, came to be known as sahejdhari
Sikhs. This term is meaningful. These sabedbaris were in a way in the evolutionary process of becoming
Singhs. They had accepted the main ideology of Sikhism, but were, for some reason or other, not ready to
follow it to its logical end.
At the time of the creation of the Khalsa, there was a rift on ideological grounds all along the line in
the Sikh ranks. Some people expressed their inability to forgo traditional usages and customs. But this
cleavage did not sever the life-line of the movement from its source of recruitment. The sahedhari Sikhs
setved as a buffer to absorb the shock which the creation of the Khalsa was bound to cause to the caste
society. Also, by being baptised at the hands of the Swdras (Panj Piaras), the Guru had symbolically made
them his Guru. This was unthinkable for the caste ideology and the caste society. Many Sikhs drawn from
the higher castes dissociated themselves from the movement, ‘Khatris and Brahmins remained aloof.’ The
second cleavage shows clearly that the creation of the Khalsa meant a complete break with the caste society.
Those who could not go whole hog with the anti-caste drive of the movement, parted company or remained
as sabejdhari Sikhs.
7. LEADERSHIP
The leadership of a movement has always an important bearing in determining the direction of the
movement. The way the question of the leadership of the Khalsa was tackled shows that Guru Gobind Singh
wanted to preserve the plebeian character of the movement.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Writing about the significance of the initiation ceremony of the Khalsa, Gokal Chand Narang states :
‘Of the five who offered their heads, one was a Khatri, all the rest being so-called Sudras. But the Guru called
them Panj Piaras, or the Beloved Five, and baptised them after the manner he had introduced for initiation
into his brotherhood. He enjoined the same duties upon them, gave them the same privileges, and as a token
of newly acquired brotherhood all of them dined together.
‘The Gutu’s views of democratic equality were much more advanced than the mete equality among
his followers could satisfy. In his system, there was no place even for the privileges of the chief or the leader.
No leader, he believed, could be fit to lead unless he was elected or accepted by the followers. History shows
that individuals or classes enjoying a religious or sacerdotal superiority, have been only too loth to forgo even
a particle of their privileges. But the Guru, regarded by his faithful followers as the greatest of prophets, was
made of a different stuff, and had too much political insight to stand on an exclusive eminence apart from his
followers. Therefore, when he had initiated his first five disciples, his Beloved Five, he was initiated by them
in turn, taking the same vows as they had done, and claiming no higher privileges than those he allowed them.
Soon after, he called a meeting of all his followers and announced his new doctrine to them.”8
The Guru did this not only because he ‘was made of a different stufP, but also because he wanted to
ensure that the leadership of the movement remained in the hands of the Khalsa, who had a plebeian
mission. The Beloved Five (of whom four were Swdras) were made the nucleus of the leadership of the
Khalsa, and this was done when the Guru’s sons were alive. More than that, by accepting initiation at the
hands of the Beloved Five, he accepted them as his own leaders. Again, at the battle of Chamkaur, when the
Sikhs requested him to leave the place so that he might reorganise the Khalsa, ‘the Guru circumambulated
them three times, laid his plume and crest in front of them, offered them his arms and cried out, ‘S77 Wahgura
ji ka Khalsa! Wahguru ji ki Fateh?
The fact that the leadership of the movement devolved on the Khalsa Panth as a whole, became an
atticle of living faith with the Sikhs. In this connection, the episode of Banda’s nomination as leader and his
subsequent parting of company with the Khalsa is very illustrative. The Khalsa agreed to follow Banda only
on the condition that he would not aspire to sovereignty.*? The Guru instructed Banda to abide by the Khalsa
and appointed select Sikhs as his advisers.” After his military successes, Banda aspired to become Guru and a
sovereign. The Tat Khalsa (the genuine Khalsa) parted company with him and his followers, because the
Guru had given :
‘Banda service and not sovereignty;
The sovereignty had been given to the Panth by
the Guru (Sacha Padshah) himself.’*!
After Banda, Kapur Singh was elected as the leader of the Khalsa. He was elected, because he was,
in those days, engaged in doing the humble services like fanning the daily congregations of the Khalsa.
Kapur Singh showed his preference for the humble service he was engaged in and entreated that he should be
spared the honour that was being conferred upon him. But, the leadership was virtually imposed upon him.
Kapur Singh, on becoming the leader, did nothing without consulting the Khalsa.
‘Showed great respect towards the Singhs;
Did nothing without taking the Panth into confidence.
(He) engaged himself in humble service with even greater vigour;
Great humility came to his mind.’”
With the end of Kapur Singh’s era, the revolutionary spirit started waning. His successor was Jassa
Singh ‘Kalal’, who was accepted leader by the Khalsa on the advice of Kapur Singh. Jassa Singh had very
humble beginnings. ‘He joined the Panth as a beggar and became its Patshab.*® Here ‘Patshal’ does not mean
sovereign ruler; it means only a supreme leader. Jassa Singh struck a coin in his own name when the Khalsa
conquered Lahore for the first time. This was so much against the spirit of collective leadership of the
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Khalsa, that a special convention was held, where it was decided to withdraw the coin from circulation.¥ In
its place, another coin struck in the name of the Guru was substituted. Polier (1780) observed, ‘As for the
Government of the Siques, it is properly an aristocracy, in which no pre-eminence is allowed except that
which power and force naturally gives; otherwise all the chiefs, great and small, and even the poorest and
most abject Siques, look on themselves as perfectly equal in all the public concerns and in the greatest
Council or Goormatta of the nation, held annually either at Ambarsar, Lahore or some other place. Everything
is decided by the plurality of votes taken indifferently from all who choose to be present at it,’ Forster also
gives a similar account. ‘An equality of rank is maintained in their civil society, which no class of men,
however wealthy or powerful, is suffered to break down. At the periods when general councils of the nation
were convened, which consisted of the army at large, every member had the privilege of delivering his
opinion, and the majority, it is said, decided on the subject in debate.’4* This shows how strong the original
spirit of equality and fraternization of the Sikh revolution must have been so that it could still reveal its
glimpses even in the post-Khalsa period.
The leadership of the collective Khalsa or the Panth, did not mean that any majority decision taken
by it had an automatic religious sanctity. The supreme consideration was that such decisions had to conform
to the Sikh ideals. So long as the Gurus were there, they saw to it that there was no deviation from the Sikh
principles. When the Sikhs of Lahore proposed to pay the fine on his behalf, Guru Arjun strongly turned
down the proposal. Similarly, Guru Gobind Singh brushed aside the views of those Sikhs who advised him
to make peace with Aurangzeb. It was the Sikh principles which were to be supreme. The Guruship was
conferred on Guru Granth Sahib, and leadership on the collective Panth. These steps were taken to ensure
that after the Gurus, the collective leadership of only those who were ideologically oriented, prevailed.
8. ITS ROLE
The creation of the Khalsa was not an idle dream. The Khalsa proved its mettle by passing through
the ordeal of fire. It is unnecessary to go into details of the struggle, because these are writ large on the pages
of Sikh history. But, it is relevant to emphasize the revolutionary mission which inspired and sustained the
movement during its critical periods.
The Khalsa had to carry on its armed conflict all along in the heart and the citadel of the Mughal
Empire. It had none of the advantages of terrain and a secure base that the Marathas had. It had no forts.
The only fortification, if this could be called a fort at all, which Guru Gobind Singh had built at Anandpur,
was lost to the movement for ever in the last battle there. After that, not to speak of a base or a fort, the
Khalsa had not a foothold or land which it could call its own. It appeared from and disappeared into the
villages, hideouts, jungles, and areas which were under the firm control of the governors of Sirhind and
Lahore. This area was close to Delhi and was on the life-line of the Mughal Empire which connected its
capital with Kabul. The Rajputs and the Marathas had found to their cost that it was not feasible to fight the
Mughal might in the plains. Bhao, the Maratha Commander in the battle of Panipat, ‘judged himself to be
unequal to cope with the Shah in the open field.’ The Khalsa had no alternative. Moreover, the area had a
large Muslim population whose hostility to the movement was very natural.
The Sikh movement was virtually crushed a number of times.* It suffered many serious reverses.
But each time, like the proverbial phoenix, it rose from its ashes. The first setback took place when Guru
Gobind Singh had to leave Anandpur, Chamkaur and finally Mukatsar. But, within an year and a half of the
Guru’s death, the Khalsa under Banda had conquered Sirhind and humbled the government of Lahore. It
was a mitacle wrought. The Guru had sent messages to the Singhs to join Banda in his campaign. He had
instructed Banda especially to put the revolutionaries from Majha in the forefront of the struggle.*7 Supreme
sacrifices were made by the Khalsa. Guru Gobind Singh was no more, but the ‘Promethean fire’ that he had
kindled was all ablaze.
The second occasion, when the Sikh movement was practically crushed, was when Banda was
defeated, captured and executed. It may not be out of place to point out that Banda’s defeat was in no small
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
measure due to the Tat Khalsa having parted company with him. The Khalsa forces had already been
weakened by this split in their ranks. The defeat of Banda was the final blow and the signal for a general
petsecution of the Singhs by the Mughal administration. The Khalsa was no longer in a position to take the
field against the Mughals. Under the relentless persecution launched by Emperor Farrukh Siyar, they were
forced to split into small bands. This was the beginning of the heroic guerilla warfare.
The time of the guerilla struggle was the most trying for the movement. We would like to quote Hari
Ram Gupta rather extensively. “The Emperor then issued a general edict which was applicable to all parts of
the Empire. According to it, every Sikh wherever seen was to be immediately arrested. He was to be offered
only one alternative, either Islam or the sword. It was to be executed there and then without any hesitation
ot loss of time. A schedule of valuable rewards was proclaimed. For every Sikh head Rs. 25/- was to be
given, and for a Sikh captive a sum of Rs. 100/- was to be awarded.”48
‘The Emperor’s orders were strictly obeyed. The Governors of Sirhind, Lahore and Jammu tried to
surpass one another in presecution of the Sikhs in order to win the goodwill of Farrukh Siyar. Abdul Samad
was entrusted with the supervision of this work. They took written undertaking from the headmen of villages
in their jurisdiction not to allow any Sikh to live there. If there were some Sikhs, they were to be arrested and
sent to the neighbouring police station. In case they could not capture them, a report was to be lodged with
Government officials about their presence. Scouts roamed about everywhere to see that the dambardars or
village headmen obeyed the Government orders. Local intelligencets were appointed to report in secret at
the nearby police or military posts. Connivance on their part resulted in imprisonment and confiscation of
property.
They declared their own lists of prizes; Rs. 10/- for supplying information about the presence of a
Sikh, Rs. 20/- for actually showing a Sikh, Rs. 40/- for helping in his capture, and Rs. 80/- for bringing every
Sikh head.’
Forster writes : “Such was the keen spirit that animated the persecution, such was the success of the
exertions, that the name of a Sicque no longer existed in the Mughal dominion. Those who still adhered to
the tenets of Nanock, either fled into the mountains at the head of the Punjab, or cut off their hair, and
exteriorly renounced the profession of their religion.”
‘The faithful followers of the Guru experienced the worst possible time in their history. Hunted like
hare and pursued like wild beasts, they wandered from place to place seeking shelter to save themselves from
the fury of the government, from the revenge of the hostile Muslim population, and from the greed of the
toady Hindus.”
‘If anybody enquired of a Hindu woman how many sons she had, she would reply that she had three
sons, but one of them had become a Sikh. Thereby she meant that the converted one should be considered
among the dead.’
‘Majha, the homeland of the Sikhs, was completely ruined.’ “A wonderful and terrible trial indeed,
from which the weak came out strong, from which the strong came out sublime. There were many great
deeds done in the small struggles of life. There was a determined though unseen bravery, which defended
itself foot to foot in the darkness, noble and mysterious triumphs which no eye could see.’”*4
It has been estimated that the number of these guerillas was at one time reduced to about two
thousand men.*> From this small force, they grew from strength to strength and not only challenged the
Mughal Empire, but became the masters of the country right up to the bank of the Jamuna. To quote Gupta
again : “Thus had the Sikhs emerged triumphant from their deadly struggle of the past thirty years; and the
long-drawn agony of their subjection came to an end, and the dream of their independence was realised.
They had admirably succeeded in holding their own and in steadily pursuing their course, notwithstanding the
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
hosts of terrors and disasters that gathered themselves together, not only to check their ardour and to
intercept their progress, but also to bring them to the verge of annihilation. Surging floods of opposition
rose and increased : the impetuous rains of consternation descended and fell; the rending storms of
desperation blew and raged; and all these opposing elements struck and beat upon them; but they could not
shake the sturdy Sikhs standing on the steel-like rock of faith and freedom. The internal vigour consisting of
their dogged faith in themselves and in the prophecy of Guru Gobind Singh that they would one day become
a nation, their determined courage and unconquerable spirit of resistance, not only sustained them against the
bloody persecution of a great Government determined to suppress them, but also raised them up again with
greater strength after every attempt to annihilate them ......’”°°
Gupta is so much impressed by the achievements of the movement that he asks the question,
“Readers! have we not witnessed a miracle 25’ The struggle waged by the Khalsa was so glorious that any
people in any culture would be proud of it.”
What was the secret of this miracle ? Was it wrought about by the ‘marauding instinct’ which is
associated with the Jats? The Jats no doubt played a significant role, but which Jats? There was Bhai Taru
Singh who preferred his scalp to be removed rather than let his hair be cut; and there were Jats who cut their
hair with their own hands in order to desert the Khalsa. One has to separate the grain from the chaff. Non-
Jats or Jats, it was those elements who had fully imbibed the Sikh ideology who worked this miracle. It is they
who were the steel-frame of the movement. It was not an ordinary warfare. It tested to the farthest human
limit a person’s faith in his cause, his tenacity of purpose, his courage and his endurance. “The story of the
Sikhs’ deeds opens up the great difference between head and heart, between knowledge and action, between
saying and doing, between words and works, and between a dead and a living faith.’>* As Bhangu has put it :
“The Singhs had no resoutces;
Were without arms and clothes.
Were naked, hungry and thirsty;
Had no ammunition with them.
Had no access to shops or markets;
Those who fell sick died for lack of medicine.
They were sustained by the hope of the Guru’s benediction;
This was the only treasure they had.’>?
Only those could come out successful through this fiery ordeal who had in full measure faith in God,
the Guru and the ultimate triumph of the righteousness of the cause. During this long period of trial, only
the best could face the challenge. The question of any weak person joining the movement for mundane
considerations did not arise. Those who did, left the faith on the first sign of crisis, as all they had to do was
to cut off their hair and join the common populace around them.
The Khalsa guerillas were dispersed into very small bands, sometimes of twos and fours, and in
widely separate areas like those of the Siwalik hills, Lakhi jungle and the desert wastes bordering Rajputana.
They had no common centre and no common leader. Contacts among the guerilla bands were rare. The
only sentiment that held them together and made them converge for collective action was attachment to a
common cause and the deepest commitment to the faith. Arjun Dass Malik writes that sustained guerilla
warfare is not possible without an ideological inspiration. “As early as the very origin of the term guerilla,
Napoleon had observed that ‘tin Spain, moral considerations made up three quarters of the game and the
relative balance of military power accounted only for the remaining quarter.’ T.E. Lawrence stresses the
same point when he says : ‘We have won a province, when we have taught the civilians in it to die for our
idea of freedom.’ Guerilla warfare thus has been ideological from the very outset.” Again, “a guerilla is not
an ill-trained, badly armed civilian-soldier, as he appeares to be; he is, rather, an intensely motivated and
highly dedicated soldier who has a keen sense of issues at stake and understands the nature of war he is
fighting. His strength lies inside, in the moral considerations which make three-fourths of him.” And, “his
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
objective lies not in the field of battle but elsewhere, among the people ...... Guerilla warfare is essentially a
form of people’s war, in which a revolutionary vanguard, relying upon the support of the people, initiates
limited armed action to gradually weaken the enemy and to bring about a situation of mass involvement
culminating in the final defeat of the enemy and the attainment of peoples’ political objective.”
REFERENCES
1. Macauliffe, M.A. : The S7kb Religion, Vol V, Low Price Publications, 1909, 1990, p.286.
2. Ibid., p. 280.
3. Ibid., p. 289.
4. Guru Granth Sahib, p. 15.
4a. Macauliffe, M.A. : op.cit. p. 299.
5. Ibid., p. 310.
6. Forster, Vol. I, p. 330.
7. Rahatname, pp. 88-89; Malcolm, p, 221; Hugel, p. 263.
7a. Latif, p. 261; Macauliffe, M.A. : op.cit.
8. Bhangu, p. 47.
9. Rabitname, p. 47.
10. Bhaneu, Rattan Singh : Panth Parkash, p. 42.
11. S17 Gur Sobha, p. 21.
12. Koer Singh, p. 130.
13. Rabitname, p. 47.
14. Ibid., p. 117.
15. Sarb Loh Granth, part 3, p. 532.
15a. Hagigat, 1LH.Q., March 1942, sup., p. 5.
16. Koer Singh, p. 202.
17. Ibid., p. 203; S7z Gur Sobba, p. 80.
18. Guru Granth Sahib, p. 918.
19. Ibid, pp. 647 648.
20. Bhangu, Rattan Singh : op.cit. p. 80.
21. Macauliffe, M.A. : op.cit. p. 66.
22. Sarb Loh Granth, part 3, pp. 531-2.
23. Bhangu, Rattan Singh : op.cit. p. 215.
24. Malcolm, Brigadier General : Astatic Researches, Vol. II (1812), pp. 252-256; Cunningham, pp.
99-100.
24a.Scott, G.B : Region and Short History of the Sikhs, p. 90.
25. Ibid., p.35.
26. Sarb Loh Granth, part 3, p. 531.
27. Sri Gur Sobha, p. 24.
28. Ibid., p. 128.
29. Rahatname, p. 47.
30. Ibid., p. 56.
31. Ibid., p. 111.
32. Guru Granth Sahib, p. 1427.
33. Ibid., p. 85.
34. Macauliffe, M.A. op.cit. p. 66.
35. Bhangu, Rattan Singh : op.cit. p. 214.
35a. Ibid., p. 326.
36. Gupta, Hari Ram : History of the Sikh Gurus, p. 189.
37. Sri Guru Sobha, p. 33; Koer Singh, pp. 132-133; Latif, p. 264.
38. Narang, Gokal Chand : Transformation of Sikhism, p. 81.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
39. Bhangu, Rattan Singh : op.cit. p. 82.
40. Ibid., p. 81.
41. Ibid., p. 131.
42. Ibid., p. 215.
43, Ibid., p. 217.
44, Budh Singh Arora: Risala-i Nanak Shab, cited by Gurbax Singh Punjab History Conference (Nov. 27-
28, 1976), Proceedings, p. 79.
45. Polier, Early European Accounts of the Sikhs, edited by Ganda Singh p. 197.
45a.Forster, Vol. i, p. 329.
46. Prinsep, H.T. : Origin of the Sikh Power in the Punjab, p. 15.
46a. Calendar of Persian Correspondence, Vol, ti, p. 85; Malcolm; Asiatic Researches (1812), p. 246; Forster, 1,
pp. 312-3; Gupta : History of the Sikhs, 1, pp. 8-10, 27-32 71-72, 82-83, 176-7, 261; Bhangu, Rattan
Singh : op.cit. pp. 232-235; Polier (P.P.P.,Oct. 1970, p. 237).
47. Bhangu, Rattan, Singh : op.cit. p. 81.
48. Gupta, Hari Ram : History of the Sikhs, Vol. II, p. 39.
49. Ibid., pp. 39-40; Bhangu, p. 235.
50. Forster, Vol. 1, 312-313.
51. Gupta, Hari Ram : Héstory of the Sikhs, Vol. UH, p. 40.
52. Ibid., p. 41.
53. Ibid., p. 45.
54. Ibid., p. 41.
55. Sita Ram Kohli : Foreword to Umdat-ut-Tawarikh of Sohan Lal Suri, Daftar iv, p. 1; Hagigat,
L.H.Q., March 1942 sup, p. 17.
56. Gupta, Hari Ram : History of the Sikhs, Vol. I, p. 281.
57. Ibid., p. 283.
58. Ibid., p. 282.
59. Bhangu, Rattan Singh : op.cit.pp. 394-305.
60. Malik Arjan Das : An Indian Guerilla War, pp. 2-4.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
18
MARTYRDOM IN SIKHISM
KHARAK SINGH
I. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Martyrdom in Sikhism is a fundamental concept and represents an important institution of the
faith. In the Sikh form the institution is a complete departure from the Indian tradition, and for that matter
radically distinguishes the whole-life character of Sikhism from the earlier dichotomous or pacific Indian
religious traditions. It is significant that the concept was emphatically laid down by Guru Nanak, and the
history of the Guru period as well as the subsequent history of the Sikhs is an open expression, in thought
and deed, of this basic doctrine.
II. THE GOAL AND CONCEPT OF MARTYRDOM
2.1 In Sikhism, Guru Nanak in the very beginning of his famous hymn ‘Japu Ji’, while rejecting the
paths of ascetic one point meditation or withdrawal, emphatically prescribes carrying out or living according
to the Will of God as the goal of man. “How to become the abode of Truth and how to demolish the wall of
falsehood ?” he asks, and then proceeds to answer, “Through following His Will.” He then defines the Will
to be the ‘Ocean of Virtues’ (gunigabira) or Altruistic. The Gurus’ basic perception of this Will is that it is
Loving or Love.
2.2 His in this context that Guru Nanak proclaims that life is a ‘game of love’, and gives a call to
humanity to follow this path. He says : “Shouldst thou seek to engage in the game of Love, step into my
street with thy head placed on thy palm : While stepping on to this street, ungrudgingly sacrifice your head”
(G.G.S., p. 1412), Repeated emphasis is laid on this goal of following the Will of God, Who is directing the
universe, in Guru Granth Sahib :
“Through perception of His Will is the Supreme State attained.” (p. 292)
“With the perception of His Will alone is the Essence realised.” (p. 1289)
“By perceiving the Lord’s Will is Truth attained.” (p. 1244)
“By His Will was the world created as a place for righteous living.” (p. 785)
“Profoundly wondrous is the Divine Will. Whoever has its perception, has awareness of the true
praxis of life.” (p. 940)
2.3 It should be clear that in Sikhism the goal is not to attain personal salvation or moksha or ‘eternal
bliss.’ It is, instead, the perception or recognition of His Will and working in line with its direction. This
state is in fact synonymous with Godrealisation.
2.4 The concept of martyrdom was laid down by Guru Nanak. In fact, his was an open challenge
and a call. His hymn calling life ‘a game of love’ is of profoundest significance in Sikh thought and theology.
It has five clear facets. It expresses in clear words the Guru’s spiritual experience of God. While he
repeatedly calls Him unknowable, his own experience, he states, is that He is All Love. Second, He is
Benevolent and Gracious towards man and the world. Third, since He expresses His Love in the world, the
same, by implication, becomes real and meaningful. Further, the Guru by giving this call clearly proclaims
both the goal and the methodology of religious life in Sikhism. The goal is to live a life of love which is in
line with His expression of Love and Grace in the world. Simultaneously, the methodology of whole-life
activity and commitment for the goal is emphasized. The significant fact is that in the entire Guru Granth
Sahib it is these principles of the Sikh way of life, that are repeatedly emphasized. There are innumerable
hymns endorsing one or the other of the above principles of Sikh theology. It is this couplet of Guru Nanak
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
that forms the basis of martyrdom in Sikhism. For, the commitment desired is total, and once on that Path
the seeker has to have no wavering in laying down his life for the cause. In his hymn Guru Nanak has
defined and stressed that the institution of martyrdom is an essential ingredient of the Path he was laying
down for man.
III. UNDERSTANDING OF THE CONCEPT
3.1 As explained above, this is exactly the meaning that the subsequent Gurus themselves have
conveyed about Guru Nanak’s thesis and thought. It is on record that one Bhai Manjh who was a Sakhi
Sarvaria, a system which enjoins only ritualistic living, came to the fifth guru, Guru Arjun, and sought his
advice as to whether or not he should become a Sikh of the Guru. The latter gave a very clear answer. He
advised him to continue with his old system and remain a Sakhi Sarvaria, until he was ready for the total
commitment demanded in the Guru’s system. He explained that to be a Sikh is to tread an extremely difficult
path, and one has not only to risk his wealth and property, but the commitment requires even the laying
down of one’s life also. Thus, the institution of martyrdom is in-built in the Sikh way of life, proclaimed in
the call of Guru Nanak. We have quoted Guru Arjun’s amplification of the hymn, lest it should be
understood that our interpretation is in any way not central to the Sikh way of life. Again it is important to
understand that the same test was applied by the tenth guru, Guru Gobind Singh, when he finally initiated the
system for the selection of the Five Praras and the creation of the Khalsa through the institution of awrit on
Vaisakhi Day, 1699 CE. At that time too, the call he gave was for total commitment and willingness to lay
down one’s life for the cause. The important fact is the unity of meaning and method of the system as laid
down by Guru Nanak, as understood and explained by the Fifth Guru, and as finally formalised by the Tenth
Guru for the creation of the Khalsa. No ambiguity had been left as to the requirement of the commitment
and the quantum of sacrifice demanded from the Sikh or the Khalsa way of life. The above explanation of
the Sikh path by three Gurus dispels the native notion held in some quarters that the first five Gurus were
only pacificist or introvertive in their outlook and method, and that they did not recommend militancy or
martyrdom.
IV. INDIAN TRADITION OF SACRIFICE AND SIKH CONCEPT OF MARTYRDOM
4.1. Because of the practice of offering sacrifices, including human sacrifices, in some old cults,
martyrdom has sometimes been traced to that institution. This requires clarification. True, not only in
primitive religions, but also in religions like Judaism and some Hindu, Devi and Nath cults the method of
sacrifice of animals stands accepted. In Judaism sacrifice of animals is a part of the Torah. Similarly, in Deo
cults sacrifice is an approved mode of propitiating the deities. This concept is based on the rationale that
expiation of sins of man is necessary, and that this can be secured only by the method of sacrifice of blood,
including sometimes human blood, in order to secure one’s future in heaven or on the Day of Judgement. In
some of these religions life is considered a suffering or sinful, and release from it, or mukti or salvation of
man is the goal. It is, perhaps, in this context of salvation from sin that Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross is
considered an event of redemption for all those who enter his fold. It is extremely incongruous, at least from
the Sikh point of view, that while many of the Indian cults of Devi, Naths and other traditions, accept ahimsa
as a cardinal virtue, they indulge in large scale sacrifice of animals. For example, at the temple of Bhairon at
the annual fair at Devi Pattan, hundreds of buffaloes, goats and pigs are sacrificed, and the mark of blood is
applied to the Nath and other devotees. ‘Kalki Purana’, which is a scripture of the Sakatas, has a chapter on
human sacrifice also. Nath practices, too, are similar. Gorakhnath’s contribution is said to be that he
substituted animal sacrifice for human sacrifice. And yet the Na#b has to take on initiation, a vow to observe
ahimsa throughout his lifetime.
4.2 It, therefore, needs emphasis that the Sikh institution of martyrdom is entirely alien to the
method of sacrifice referred to above. In Guru Granth Sahib there is a clear condemnation of the sacrifice of
animals to propitiate gods. Guru Granth Sahib records : “Slaughter of animals you dub as religion — Then
brother ! Tell what is irreligion ? Each other you style as saints — Then who is to be called butcher ?”
(p.1103). The Sakata cult and its practices have been particularly deprecated. In Guru Granth Sahib the very
system of gods, goddesses and incarnation has been rejected. There is not a trace of any event of such animal
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
sactifice on the part of the Gurus or the Sikhs in the entire Sikh history. Thus, the Sikh concept of
martyrdom is unrelated to the system of animal sacrifices, or expiation through blood.
4.3 The rationale of the Sikh concept is entirely different. Since human life is an opportunity and its
goal is to carry out the Altruistic Will of God, the very concept of release from life is rejected. It is so in all
whole-life religions or miri-piri systems. As the Guru’s hymn states, one has to live a life of commitment to
the cause of love, and in pursuance of it one has to struggle against oppression by the powerful. Muki,
salvation or ‘release’ means freedom from egoism, selfishness and individualism, says the Guru. Two
objectives have to be sought simultaneously, namely, release from self-centredness, living a life of love, and
struggle against the forces of injustice. It is this kind of love of God that a Sikh strives for. The Bible also
says that one should love God with all one’s heart and, simultaneously, love one’s neighbour as well. Guru
Nanak says, “He who is fond of God, what cares he for mukti or heaven >” The goal is to fall in line with
God’s love for man and practise virtues in fulfilment of His Altruistic Will, On the one hand, the Guru
rejects ahimsa as a creed, and states that those who indulge in debate over meat eating do not know what sin
is. On the other hand, he lays down that love integrally involves struggle for the oppressed and against the
tyrant, God himself being the ‘Destroyer’ of the evil and demonical. This was very clearly explained by the
Sixth Guru to Sant Ramdas, when he stated that he was distinctly following the path of Guru Nanak, and that
his sword was for destruction of the tyrant and help to the weak. Accordingly, while the institution of
martyrdom is entirely unrelated to the method of blood sacrifice, prevalent in India and outside, it follows
clearly from Guru Nanak’s system of love and help to the oppressed and struggle against Evil, as instrument
of God’s Love. Explanation for the institution of martyrdom was given by Guru Arjun to P7r Mianmir, when
the Sufi Saint came to meet him in prison. “T bear all this torture to set an example. The true test of faith is
the hour of misery. Without example to guide, ordinary persons’ minds quail in the midst of suffering. And,
if he, who possesses power within him, defends not his religion by open profession thereof, the man who
possesses no such power will, when put to torture, abjure his faith. The sin will light on the head of him who
has the power but showeth it not; and God will deem him an enemy of religion”
V. EXPRESSION OF THE INSTITUTION
5.1 The first landmark in this field is the sacrifice by the Fifth Guru. The compiler of Sri Adi
Granth, himself became the first martyr of the faith. Here is a coincidence which most scholars from the
pacific or social science group have missed. Today, many Christian theologians like Moltmann, Metz,
Liberation theologians, and Black theologians, emphasize and interpret Christ’s martyrdom on the Cross as a
fundamental political act of confrontation with the state or the Forces of Oppression. Historically it is well-
known now that Guru Arjun’s martyrdom was an open act of confrontation with the state, initiative for
which was taken by the Guru. There is ample evidence to indicate that Guru Arjun had created a ‘state
within a state.’ This is recorded by contemporary Mohsin Fani and other historians like H.R. Gupta. Today
even scholars like Juergensmeyer concede that the Mughal military state considered the early Sikh Gurus to be
heading a separate community. Jehangir’s autobiography is clear as to how he felt disturbed about the Guru
and why he ordered the extreme step of his execution by torture. Heads of state are never concerned about
pacificists. On the other hand, Mughal Emperors many a time sought their blessings. Facts about Guru
Arjun’s martyrdom ate too glaring and open to leave any ambiguity in their interpretation. Beni Parsad,
historian of Jehangir, records that Guru Arjun gave an amount of Rs. 5,000 to Khusro who was heading his
army of revolt against Emperor Jehangir. The Guru blessed him. It was an open support to a rebel claimant
for the throne. Obviously, the news was conveyed to the Emperor. He records in his autobiography that he
had been observing this new socio-teligious development and thinking of putting an end to it. He records
with obvious rancour the incident of the Guru’s meeting with rebel Khusro, his rival, and blessing him with a
tilak. Political and military leaders are concerned only with the political potential of a move or movement. It
is this potential as adjudged by the Emperor, that forced him to take the extreme step of ordering the Guru’s
execution and confiscation of his property. Evidently, the Fifth Guru’s martyrdom, and confrontation with
the state was the result of positive initiative taken by the Guru himself, both because of his organisation of
the Panth and his help to rebel Khusro. It is important to know why the Guru took this step. A number of
facts clarify the issue. Significantly, while he gave to Khusro a substantial sum of Rs. 5,000, collected by the
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
system of Daswandb introduced by him, he refused to give even a penny towards the fine imposed on him by
the Emperor. Not only that. He also forbade the Sikhs or anyone to make a collection for payment of the
fine. He explained, as noted earlier, the role of a Sikh or a martyr, to Mianmir, who came to see him in
prison. The Guru’s statement embodies three elements, viz., the need for open profession, fearlessness, and
readiness to die for the faith. The above is the story of the martyrdom of the Fifth Guru. The initiative for it
proceeded from the Guru. It would thus be idle to suggest that the first five Gurus were pacificists, and that
the militant turn in Sikhism arose because the Mughal Administration executed Guru Arjun Dev Ji.
5.2. From the Sixth Guru onwards preparations for militancy were undertaken with mounting
vigour. The Guru clearly stated two things. First, that what he was doing, namely, confrontation with
tyranny and help to the oppressed, was in pursuance of the thesis of Guru Nanak, as explained in his hymns.
Second, the Guru clarified that those who lay down their lives while fighting for a cause in the Sikh struggle,
perform a religious duty. Contemporary Mohsin Fani says, “The Guru told him that on Doomsday his
disciples would be asked to give an explanation for their deeds.” He adds, “The Sikhs believe that all
disciples of the Guru go to Heaven.” It needs to be stated that the concepts of Doomsday and Heaven are
not Sikh concepts, but they represent the way Mohsin Fani interprets the words of the Guru in terms of his
own theology. It is on record that dying for a cause in the Sikh armies has always been considered dying a
martyr’s death. Thus, the lead given by the Fifth Guru became a major institution of the Sikh Pan#A, resulting
in heroism and martyrdom of thousands for the cause of the Guru and the Pantb. This role of the Panth and
the institution of martyrdom continued throughout the later Sikh history.
5.3 Here the martyrdom of the Ninth Guru also needs mention. It was reported to the Emperor
that Guru Tegh Bahadur was heading a new nation, and that he had virtually raised the banner of revolt with
his military preparations. On this the Emperor is reported to have conveyed to the Guru that if he gave up
his political and military activities, and confined his mission to preaching and praying, he would be given state
grants. The Guru declined the offer, and thus followed his martyrdom. Three things are clear. The Imperial
perception was that the Guru was creating a nation in opposition to the state. Yet, despite the clear offer of
grant the Guru declined to give up his political role. The consequences of rejecting the offer were clear to the
Guru and everyone. But the choice was very emphatically made by him. Governor Timur Shah also
mentions the offer made to the Guru. Evidently, both for the state and the Sikh Movement, confrontations
between the two, with its logical consequences of struggle and martyrdom, were known continuing events.
This is the part of martyrdom the Gurus laid down and led. The Sikhs have since followed it. Ultimately,
Guru Tegh Bahadur, and his companions, Bhai Mati Das and Dyal Das, suffered martyrdom in reference to
the oppression in Kashmir for conversion of Hindus to Islam. The subsequent struggles of Guru Gobind
Singh, Banda and the Sikhs are well-known. At Chamkaur Sahib the Guru himself asked his two sons to go
in for the unequal battle : “My sons, you are dear to me. You are born to destroy the tyrants (Turks). Only if
you sacrifice yourselves in the battle, can the tyrants be eliminated. There can be no better opportunity than
the present one. Both of you go and join the battle.” And, when his elder son died fighting there, the Guru
said, “Today he has become the chosen Khalsa in God’s Court.” Thus, the concept of martyrdom for a
righteous cause was explained, demonstrated and sanctioned by the Guru.
5.4. In the Sikh tradition all the forty who died to a man in the battle at Chamkaur Sahib, and all the
forty who died fighting at Muktsar are called ‘Mu&ias’, or the ‘Released Ones’, or martyrs by the Sikh religious
definition. In fact, it is also known that with Guru Gobind Singh were a number of Sikhs called ‘Mukias’,
who belonged to the Khalsa Order and had made a commitment to sacrifice their all for the cause of God
and the Guru. They were considered Live Muksas. In contrast, the concept of Vadebi Mukta in the Vedantic
system is entirely different. Swami Sivananda writes about them, “Such a Videhi Mukta who is absolutely
merged in Brahman, cannot have the awareness of the world which is non-existent to him. If his body is to
be maintained, it has to be fed and cared for by others. The zdehi Mukia is thus not in a position to engage
himself for the good of the world.” It is also known that the two very young children of the Guru were
executed, but refused to embrace Islam. The contribution of P7r Budhu Shah in the militant struggle of Guru
Gobind Singh, is an extremely revealing event. Here is a Pir or a divine of another religion, who joins the
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
armies of the Guru with hundreds of his followers, involving even the loss of life of two of his sons in the
battles. This outstanding and unique event could never happen, unless Per Budhu Shah had complete
ideological affinity with the goal of the Guru, and the institution of martyrdom. That institution, it is well-
known, is also a significant factor in the ideology of Islam. The only slight difference is eschatological. In
the case of Islam the inspiration is hope of a pure life in Heaven. In Sikhism it means discharging one’s
responsibilities towards God and partaking in His Love for all human beings and life. On no other
assumption can we explain Pir Budhu Shah’s and the Sikh sacrifices in their struggle against evil. It also
explains clearly that the Sikh institution of martyrdom has no historical or ideological relation with human or
animal sacrifices common in some religions or cults.
5.5 Actually, in the post-Guru period there was a mis/ of Sikhs called mis/ Shahidan (living martyrs).
They were the most respected group of Sikhs. It is Guru Gobind Singh who weaned away Banda from his
ascetic life, and asked him not to die a coward’s death, but to die a brave man’s death, which was the real
secret of life. Banda and his 700 companions faced death without flinching, and refused conversion to Islam.
Even a young boy whose mother had obtained pardon for him refused to give up his faith and instead
contradicted the statement of his mother that he was not a Sikh, and courted martyrdom. Sikh history of the
18th century is full of deeds of martyrs. Thousands of them refused to give up their faith, but courted torture
and death boldly because the administrative orders were to destroy all Nanak-panthis or Sikhs, root and
branch.
5.6 In sum, in Sikhism the institution of martyrdom is an integral part of the system enunciated by
Guru Nanak, and the lead in the matter was given by the Fifth Guru. The Sixth Guru explained how
destruction of the tyrant and protection of the weak were parts of the religion of Guru Nanak, and the
dictates of God.
5.7 Here it is not just incidental, but very logical in Sikh religion and the Sikh tradition, to state that
during the period of Independence Movement, of the 121 persons hanged, 2,644 imprisoned for life, and
1,300 massacred in the Jallianwala Bagh protest meeting, 93, 2,047, and 799, respectively, were Sikhs. Also,
of the soldiers who fought under Subhash Chander Bose in the Indian National Army, 60% were Sikhs.
Again, in 1975, when Prime Minister Indira Gandhi imposed the Emergency Laws curtailing all human rights
and liberties, the Sikhs were the only people who sustained an organised struggle against this invasion on
human freedom, involving the arrest of over 40,000 Sikhs, when in the rest of India not even one tenth of
that number offered arrest as a protest. The movement was run from the Golden Temple, meaning thereby
that for Sikhs the struggles against injustice and oppression and consequent martyrdom are a religious
responsibility and have religious sanction.
VI INDIVIDUAL V/S COMMUNITARIAN RIGHTS
6.1 It has often been said that ideologies that lay emphasis on rights of the community, the state or
the nation, are far more concerned about the society as a whole than the individual, and for that reason tend
to sacrifice individual rights. This tendency is there in all national states, whether secular or religious. True,
in modern states in the West there is an increasing emphasis on securing individual rights. But patriotism
evetywhere continues to be an important social virtue, although the right of the conscientious objector is
being increasingly recognised. The main criticism of dictatorships by Western democracies has been on this
score, suggesting that the excesses committed by secular rulers like Hitler and Stalin are really due to their
concern for the community and not the individual. The Sikh understanding on this issue is entirely different.
It is evident that the working of free market economies or capitalism can be equally oppressive, both for the
individual and the community. The increasing gaps between the rich countries and the poor countries, and
the rich and the poor in the same countries are, as lamented by the authors of the Limits of Growth, due not to
any lack of concern for the individual or the community, but follow squarely from ego-centricism of man,
which needs to be curbed. The Sikh understanding is that no amount of external pressure or even freedom
of the individual can secure over-all justice for all, until man’s sense of morality and self-discipline is
awakened and developed. And there is no reason to believe that Enlightenment, Science or Technology or
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
individual freedom has in any way enhanced his sense of self-control or morality. In fact, it has often been
argued that over emphasis on individual tights has only loosened man’s moral brakes, instead of
strengthening them. The phenomena of Hitler, Stalin, and Hiroshima could never happen, if there had been
any real rise in the level of moral discipline either in Secular Democracies or in Secular Dictatorships.
6.2 In Sikhism the villain of peace is the egoism of man, which, it is believed, is due to his present
level of development, and not due to any in-built deficiency or sin. Hence, while Sikhism has been the
foremost in emphasising equality between man and man, and between man and woman, it has been equally
emphatic on two other scores. First, that there is hope for improvement and that this improvement towards
a higher level is man’s destiny. This gives abundant optimism or ‘Charhdi Kala, which is a Sikh religious
doctrine. Second, that a balance is necessary and the individual sense of internal discipline has to be
developed. The institution of martyrdom, the Sikhs believe, is a distinct step towards creation of that internal
discipline. Since God loves one and all, all individual effort, howsoever seemingly expensive to the individual,
only serves God’s Love for the individual and all. This is the lesson Guru Arjun and Guru Tegh Bahadur
gave by their martyrdoms, and Guru Gobind Singh demonstrated when he sent his two sons to die in the
battle at Chamkaur.
VII. CONCLUSION
7.1. The above narration makes it plain that in a whole-life religion, where the spiritual perception is
that God is Love, and Destroyer of the evil, martyrdom is an essential institution. For, life is a game of love;
and in helping and protecting the weak from oppression, confrontation with the unjust and tyrants, as
explained by the Sixth Guru himself to Sant Ramdas of Maharashtra, becomes a religious responsibility, in the
discharge of which martyrdom of the religious man or seeker sometimes becomes inevitable. It is, therefore,
no accident of history that Guru Arjun was the first prophet in the religious history of India to be a martyr of
faith. Nor is it an accident that Guru Tegh Bahadur and the Tenth Guru sacrificed their all for the cause of
truth or religion. Similarly, it is no accident that for over a hundred years, the Gurus kept an army and
struggled with the oppressive Empire involving the loss of life of thousands of Sikhs who are considered, as
in the case of Islam, another whole-life religion, martyrs. Secondly, the Sikh Gurus have demonstrated that
not only is martyrdom a religious and essential institution, but it is also the most potent method of education
and training a people for making sacrifices for the cause of righteousness, love and truth. This is amply
proved by the capacity of the Sikhs to make maximum sacrifices for the cause of religion and man. Thus, the
prominence of this institution in Sikhism not only shows its whole-life character; but also clearly distinguishes
it from dichotomous, quietist or pacific systems where this institution is conspicuous by its absence. Hence,
the institution of martyrdom in Sikhism, on the one hand, forms its fundamental feature, and, on the other
hand, proves its class and character.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
19
SIKH RAHIT MARYADA AND SIKH SYMBOLS
GOBIND SINGH MANSUKHANI
Sikhism is a dynamic and practical religion. Sikh Rabit Maryada started with Guru Nanak’s sangat and
pangat. \n their compositions, the Gurus not only formulated the tenets of the Sikh faith, they also gave us
guidelines for a Sikh way of life, known as the Rahit Maryada. The word Rahit means ‘how to live’ and
Maryada means tradition and practice of the faith. The words Rafi and Jap are used in Guru Granth Sahib;
for example :
1) Sewa surt sabad veechar, jap tap sanjam haumai mar. Javan mukt ja sabad sunae, sachi rabat sacha sukh pae.
(G.GS., p. 1343)
il) Kabat mukt, sunat mukt, rahit janam rahate. (G.GS., p.1230)
it) Ghal khai kichu hathau dei, Nanak rah pachhanai set. (G.GSS., p. 1245)
(Earn your living with honest work and share your earnings with others. This is the way of
truthful living).
tv) Baba hor khana khushi Rhuwar,
Jit khade tan peerie, mun mab chale vikar. (G.GS., p. 16)
The Gurus warned the Sikhs against the use of alcohol and wine and also emphasised the dangers
of alcohol, i.e. alcohol destroys one’s sense of discrimination.
(1) Jet peete mutt door hoi, baral pave wich ai. (G.GS., p. 554)
(Drinking wine takes away sense, and dementia results).
(ii) It mud peete Nanaka, bahute khateeah bikar. (G.GS., p. 553)
(By drinking such wine numerous sins are earned).
Guru Ram Das laid down a Sikh’s routine as under :
“Guru satguru ka jo sikh akhave, so bhalke uthh Har nam dhiave,
Udam kare bhalke prabhatee, isnan kare amritsar nave? (G.G.S., p. 305)
Bhai Gurdas also wrote many verses in his ars on the Sikh way of life :
“Kurbani tina Gur sikhan, pichhal ratee uthh babande” (Var, 12-2)
“Dekh paraian changeean, mavan bhainan, dheean jane (Var, 12)
When Guru Gobind Singh created the Khalsa, he defined the goal of the Khalsa as :
“Jagat jot japai nis basar, ek bina mun naik na ane, Pooran prem parteet saje, birt gor marhi mutt bhool na
mane.” (Dasam Granth, p. 712)
(Only they who keep alight the unquenchable torch of Truth,
And never swerve from thoughts of One God,
Do not thus believe, even by mistake,
In fasting, monastic life or worshipping forebears,
May be recognised as True members of the Khalsa).
Guru Gobind Singh issued the following Hukamnama (Gurtu’s Proclamation) to the sangat
(congregation) of Kabul on 26th Jeth, 1756 Bikrami (23rd May, 1699 A.D.) soon after the founding of the
Khalsa. In this, he mentioned the Ra/it and especially, the five symbols, as under! :
< siqgurU jI shwie
srb°’q sMgq kwbl gurU rKY gw;
qusW augy AswfI bhuq KuSI hy [
qusW KMfy dw AMimRq pMjW gqoN 1Yxw '
kys rv Kxy ... ieh AswfI mohr hyY [
k*C ikrpwn dw ivswh nhIN krnw 7
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
srb loh dw kVw h’Q r°Kxw ;
donoN vkq kysW dI pwlnw krnIi :
srb’q sMgq AbwikKAw dw ku’ Tw Kwvy nhIN ;
qmwkU nw vrqnw
BwdnI qQw kMinAw mwrn vwly soN myl nw r°Ko [
mIixy, msMdIey, rwm rweley kI sMgq n byYso :
gurbwxI pVHnI .. vwihgurU vwihgurU jpnw;
guru KI raihgqee° RxD vsccssccssscsievces
srb’q sMgq Eupr myrI “uSI hy [
pwaqSwhI 10
jyT 26
sMmq 1756
Copy of the letter written by Guru Gobind Singh
to the sangat of Kabul (Afghanistan). The
original manuscript can be seen in the $.G.P.C.
Library, Amritsar (Punjab, India).
“Sarbat sangat Kabul Guru rakhe ga
Tusa ute asadee bahut khusi hai
Tusi Khande da Amrit Panjan ton lena
Kesh rakhne ...... th asadee mohur hai;
Kachh, Kirpan da visab nahee Rarna
Sarab loh da kara hath rakhna
Dono vakat Resan dee palna Rarna
Sarbat sangat abhakhia da kutha Khave naheen,
Tamakoo na vartana
Bhadni tatha Ranya-maran-vale se mel na rakhe
Meene, Massandyei, Ramraiye ki sangat na baiso.
Gurbani parhni ...... Waheguru, Wabeguru japna.
Guru kee rahat rakbnee.
Sarbat sangat oopar meri khushi hai.” Patshahi Dasvin
Jeth 26, Samat 1756
(Through the grace of our Immortal True Lord,
To the entire sangat at Kabul.
The Guru will protect the sangat,
I am pleased with you all.
You should take baptism by the sword, from Five Beloveds
Keep your hair uncut, for this is a seal of the Guru,
Accept the use of shorts and a sword.
Always wear iron kara on your wrist,
Keep your hair clean and comb it twice a day.
Do not eat halal (Rosher) meat,
Do not use tobacco in any form,
Have no connection with those who kill their daughters
Or permit the cutting of their children’s hair.
Do not associate with Meenas, Massands and Ram-raiyas
(anti-sikh cults)
Recite the Guru’s hymns.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Meditate on “The Name of our Wonderful Lord,”
Follow the Sikh code of discipline,
I give the entire sangat my blessing).
(Signature of 10th Guru)
Jeth 26, 1756 Bikrami (23rd May, 1699 A.D.)
Kavi Sainapat, the court poet of Guru Gobind Singh, in his composition entitled Gur Sobha illustrates
more aspects of the Sikh discipline.
“Aisee reet rahat bataee, santan sunee adhik mun bhaee” (26-141)
“Panch kee Ru-sangat taj, sangat so preet Rare,
Daya aur Dharam dhar, tiyage sabh lalsa,
Huka na peevai, sis dharee na mundae,
So to Waheguru, Waheguru, Waheguru ji ka Khalsa.” (31-147)
Bhai Desa Singh emphasises the importance of Ra/it in his Rabitnama :
‘Rahat bina nah Sikh Rahave, Rahat bina dar chotan khave.”
Rahitnamas : The Rabitnamas were written by some of the Guru’s devoted Sikhs. They contain details
of the Sikh code of discipline. H. McLeod in his latest attack on Sikhism writes, “The Sikh code of discipline
— Rabit Maryada and the Sikh symbols were evolved during the 18th century as a result of gradual growth,
though the tradition declares they were definitely settled by a pronouncement of Guru Gobind Singh and
were patt of the Baisakhi day proceedings in 1699 A.D.”? The Hukamnama to the sangat of Kabul, issued
seven weeks after the Vaisakhi (1699), quoted above, is a plain rebuttal of McLeod’s insinuations. The
Rahitnama of Bhai Prahlad Singh mentions the five K’s (Panj-kakkars) :
“Kachha, kesh, Rangha, Rirpan, Rara, aur jo Raray bakhan
Th kakay panj tum mano, Guru Granth ko sach tum mano’?
So also the Rahitnama of Chaupa Singh gives the names of the five K’s :
“Kachh, kara, Rirpan, kangha, kesh ki,
Th panj kakaree rabhat dhare Sikh so.’*
According to Bhai Nandlal, the poet laureate of Guru Gobind Singh’s court, five K’s were the
definite marks of the Khalsa :
“‘Sikbi nishani panj haraf ast Raf,
Hargiz na bashad arzi panj maf,
Kara, kardo, kachha, Rangha bidan,
Bina kesh, hech ast jumle nishan.’”
Giani Gian Singh, the author of Panth Prakash, also confirms the Sikh symbols :
“Rakhab kachh, kesh, Rara, Rirpan, singh nam ko iho nishan,
Kangha, kesh ke sung rahe, iho panj kakar dareb.” (Panth Prakash, p. 233)
Piara Singh Padam has mentioned the authors of 14 compositions along with their dates which
contain details of Rahit Maryada.6 Pandit Tara Singh Narotam, in his book entitled S77 Guru Tirath Sangrah
written in 1884, has listed 21 Rahitnamas by different authors. It is possible, that some of these Rabitnamas
may have later interpolations, but to reject all outright is an error. McLeod himself translated Bhai Chaupa
Singh’s Rahitnama and has given its details along with the three versions.
There is, therefore, overwhelming and irrefutable evidence to prove that the Rahit and the five
symbols of the Khalsa were proclaimed by the Tenth Guru. The traditional records of these facts cannot be
later creations.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Following are the principles on which the Rabit Maryada is based :
() Symbols or commandments, which promote virtue and discourage vice. For example, Aachha and
kara. Kachha symbolises chastity and moral purity in thought and action. Kara acts to warn against forgetting
God and, in so doing, being overtaken by wrong or evil desires.
(ii) Emphasis on those symbols or actions which promote cohesion and co-operation among Sikhs.
For example, the five K’s are not only tokens of identity, but also of fellowship and espirit de corps, which is
further ensured by the use of a standardised greeting : “Waheguru ji ka Khalsa, Waheguru ji ki Fateh.”
(iil) There are also those symbols which encourage a concern for the poor and the helpless. The
kirpan (Sikh sword) is meant to defend the victims of tyranny, injustice or exploitation. It emphasises the
need to defend the weak, the downtrodden and the helpless.
(iv) Further, there is a series of injunctions against indulging in evil habits or association with vicious
petsons. The prohibition against tobacco, and adultery is to encourage personal well-being and social health.
The dissociation with anti-Sikh cults, like the Meenas (followers of Baba Prithichand), Dhirmahas, Ram-rayas
and other anti-Sikh sects, is to discourage apostasy and maintain purity in the Khalsa brotherhood.
Some say that the Khalsa Panth was created by Guru Gobind Singh to meet the challenge of his
times, to resist oppression and to undo the erosion of human rights. But, Guru Hargobind on his accession
to the guruship, started wearing two swords, one of prr7, or spiritual power and the other of mir, or temporal
power. This was more than 90 years before the creation of the Khalsa ! Guru Hargobind trained his Sikh
soldiers in martial arts and fought four battles against tyranny and its Moghul perpetrators. Guru Hargobind
clearly told Sant Ramdas that his sword was for the protection of the weak and destruction of the tyrant.
Even Guru Gobind Singh, when in his teens, fought the battle of Bhangani and the battle of Nadaun against
the oppressors before he had created the Khalsa in 1699.
The creation of the Khalsa was a historic event unrelated to any local situation. It was in fulfilment
of the Guru’s mission to propagate righteousness and to destroy evil. This two-fold purpose became
achievable with the creation of the Khalsa Panth. The Khalsa describes an ideal man’s intent in the support of
goodness and morality and the protection of basic human rights. As such, they have an external uniform and
inner vision. The external uniform included the five K’s and the practice of virtuous and gallant deeds. Inner
inspiration was achieved by a constant recall of and reflection on Gurbani coupled with meditation or Naam-
simran on God’s Name. Both functions were succintly summed up by Guru Gobind Singh as under :
“Dhan jeo tah Rau jug mai,
Mukh te Hari, chit main judh bichare” (Dasam Granth)
(Blessed are those of this world, who invoke God’s Name in their minds and fight against the evil
in their hearts).
Khalsa Symbols: Let us examine the five K’s one by one and consider their significance in the context
of the Khalsa Panth.
1. Kesh: Reference to kesh or Reshas (ancut hair) is to be found in many places in Guru Granth
Sahib. Hair is not only regarded as a symbol of saintliness or holiness, but also as a proof of one’s living in
harmony with the Will of God. All the Sikh Gurus and most of the saints of India left their hair intact. God
was described by Guru Arjun as under :
“Teray bankay loen dant reesala,
Sohne nuk jin lambray vala.” (G.GSS., p. 567)
(You have adoring eyes and sparkling teeth, You have a beautiful nose and long hair.)
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
While speaking to the Muslims about their faith, Guru Nanak stressed the need to maintain natural
hair covered with a turban.
“Nanak pak kar hadon hadeesa, sabit soorat dastar sira” (G.GS., p. 1084)
The Guru was not introducing something new. In India, hair was kept naturally by all sorts of
persons. Hair was cut on the death of a relative as an expression of grief, or as a punishment for a sin. The
Sikhs believe if hair is provided by God, with its peculiar distribution over our bodies, then we should respect
this. Trimming or shaving only emphasises the futility of human effort, when opposing the natural law. To
maintain hair is an article of Sikh faith; it is regarded as the seal of the Guru. The head of a devout Sikh is
also an offering to the Guru as a proof of his devotion. In the past, Sikhs have made tremendous sacrifices
to safeguard the sanctity of their hair.
Another explanation for the prescription of unshorn hair is that a Khalsa should look like his Guru
and wear a natural uniform which is both inexpensive and dignified, i.e., to keep the Guru’s form. Thus, the
keeping of uncut hair and wearing a turban are both necessary. Guru Gobind Singh gave his own form to the
Khalsa :
“Khalsa mero roop hai khas, khalse mai hau Raron nivas.” (Sarab Loh Granth)
During the first half of the 18th century, the Moghal rulers of the Punjab offered rewards for the
head of a Sikh. As a result, the Sikhs receded into the jungles, but still did not cut their hair. Bhai Taru Singh
faced death rather than allowing his hair to be cut. Sardar Mehtab Singh was sawn alive, but he too retained
his hair and refused to give up his faith. Giani Gian Singh wrote :
“Mai Gursikhi nah tajohon, Resan swasan sang nibahon” (Panth Prakash, p. 752)
Instructions regarding the care of hair are mentioned in the RaAitnama of Bhai Chaupa Singh :
“Guru ka Sikh kesan dee palana kare ...... Maila Hath na Jae, joon na paven de, suchet rahe. Guru ki Mohar
Nishani Sikhi hi jane.” (92)?
(Sikhs of the Guru should look after their hair. They should not touch their hair with dirty hands
ot allow lice to get into them. They should always regard their hair as the seal of the Guru.)
Bhai Koer Singh in Gur Bilas (1752) wrote :
“Shastra mel, Gur sabad se, Rachh, Resan sud prem,
karad rakhani panche eb, taje na Rabahi nem.” (40)
Bhai Sukha Singh in Gur Bilas Patshashi Dasvin (1797) wrote :
“Bina Shastra kesan nare bhed janeo; Gahe kan tia ko kit loi sidbano Ihe more agia sun lai piyare, bina teg
kesan divo na deedare.”
Rattan Singh Bhangu in Prachin Panth Prakash (1841) observed :
“Kesan ki kijob pritpal, na ustran (razor) se Ratiyo bal.” (18)
Almost all the Rahitnamas lay special emphasis on the maintenance of unshorn hair, for it is not only
the most obvious symbol of the Sikhs, but also a sign of their commitment and devotion to the Guru.
‘Kesh bahar di Sikhi, nishani Sikhi di hai,
Sikhi andar hovai, dono sikhia barabar rahe.” (Chaupa Singh)®
“Kesan dhoop dei such pavan, Hai it Gur ki Mobur suhavan.” (69)
There are details of how to keep one’s hair clean by washing it with curd, soap-nuts (areethha) and
Puller’s earth (gachni). It should be regularly combed so that it does not get entangled or matted. Hair should
not be nibbled, cut, plucked or dyed.° The facial hair, specially the beard and the moustache, should receive
extra care. According to Desa Singh’s Rahitnama :
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
‘Dahra, muchh, sirr kesh banaee,
hai th Rirt ja prabhoo rajaee,
met rajai jo sees mundave,
kab te jag Raise Har pave ?” (70)1°
(Beard, moustache and hair should be properly maintained, because these are the tasks assigned
under the Divine Will. One who shaves his head against the Divine Will, how can he attain salvation ?)
2. Kangha: Kangha ot the comb is a necessary adjunct for the hair. It should be on hand to keep the
hair neat and tidy. It is, therefore, fixed in the hair knot. According to Bhai Kahn Singh, the best way to
clean the hair with a Aangha is to spread out a handkerchief and to collect the dead skin and fallen hair on to
it. Then later burn it. It is wrong to fix a miniature sword on the Rangha as is done by some Sikhs. We may
as well put a miniature Rachba and a kara or its drawing on the kangha. That would be ridiculous! Bhai
Nandlal observed that the hair should be combed twice daily and a turban neatly tied on the head.
“Kangha donah vakat kar, pug chunab kar bandhaee’ (13)!
3. Kara: Kara is a citcular bangle made of steel. It reminds us of the iron will of the Khalsa. Kara
tinkles and reminds us of fulfilling the Khalsa vows. Kara is worn on the right or the left wrist according to
being right or left handed. Kara is not an ostentatious ornament. It should not be made of gold or other
precious metal.
4. KACHHA OR KACHHAHRA : Kachha or underwear is meant to cover the private parts of the
body. It is a symbol of moral restraint and conjugal fidelity. It keeps the wearer covered at all times. It also
enables the wearer to move with briskness and agility. In the Rabitnamas, it is given as much importance as
the other symbols.
“Kachh, Rirpan na kabahoo tiyage.” (Desa Singh Rabitnama)
Bhai Daya Singh mentions that the underwear should remain above the knees so as not to restrict
freedom of movement.
“Goday walee Kachh na pahane?'3 (Daya Singh Rabitnama)
Kachh along with kesh and Rirpan are called Tra-mudra (The three emblems)
‘Kachh, kesh, Rarad, Guru ki teen mudraih,
Pas te na door Raray, sada ang sung dhar” (Sarab Loh Granth)!*
5. Kirpan: Kirpan means sword. It is generally suspended from a belt across the chest. According
to Kahn Singh, &zrpan literally means a ‘house of compassion,’ which implies that it is an instrument of
compassion for helping victims of injustice and oppression. Others say that it is a combination of two words
: Rirpa and aan, kirpa means grace of compassion, aav means honour or dignity. That is, the &irpan is an
instrument of compassion to protect and safeguard dignity or honour of others. Krpan is also called karad,
tegh, shamsher, bhagauti.
Guru Gobind Singh regarded the sword as an emblem of power or shaktz. He refers to God as
Bhagauti and Sarab Loh (All Steel).
KURAHITS :
Kurahits are prohibitions to be observed by amritdhari Sikhs. There are four &urabits (major lapses) as
under :
(i) Not To Cut One’s Hair/s: This is both a positive command, as also an injunction. Chaupa Singh
states :
“Guru ka Sikh bhadan na kare.”
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
This is a prohibition against cutting or destroying body hair. On the positive side, the Guru wants
his Sikhs to come to him in a way that he approves; Sukha Singh wrote :
“The mor agia suno he piare,
Bina tegh Kesan divo na deedare (Gur Bilas, Patshahi Dasvin)
Chaupa Singh emphasises the prohibition against the cutting of hair :
“Guru da Sikh dehi de rom na luhae.” (54)
(Rahitnama Chaupa Singh).'5
Sukha Singh also warns the Sikhs against shaving their hair :
“Bikhia Kirya bhadan tiagah, jata joot rahbo anuragah.” (Gur Bilas)
(it) Probibition On Use Of Tobacco: The use of tobacco in any form is forbidden. Whether smoking a
biri, a cigarette, a pipe or a huka. Snuff-taking is also forbidden. Giani Santokh Singh wrote :
“Ganda dhoom bans te tiagah, ut gilan ts te dhar bhagah. (Suraj Prakash-1-44)
Bhai Desa Singh’s Raditnama mentions :
“Bhang tamakoo nikat na jave, Tin te bhi such degh Rarave.” (154)
Sainapat states in Gur Sobha :
“Huka tiyage Har gun gavai, achha bhojan Har ras pavai, Bhadban tiyag karo re bhaee, tah sikhan yah bat
sunace.” 16 (21-137)
(itl) Halal Meat: The Tenth Guru prohibited the eating of ha/a/ meat, because the Muslim rulers had
prohibited the sale of any meat except halal (kosher). The reason for this ban is that halal or kutha meat
involves a lot of cruelty to the animal by gradual bleeding from the jugular vein. Secondly, it was a symbol of
slavery as one had no choice but to take the prescribed meat from the Muslim vendors. According to the
Guru, if meat was to be eaten, Sikhs should kill the animal with a single sword blow. This meat called jhatka
is permitted to the Sikhs.
“Bakra jhatka chhake ta chhakay, avar mas val Rabi na takay”
(Desa Singh Rahitnama)
Bhai Chaupa Singh wrote against the use of £utha meat :
“Jo kutha Rhave so neech tankhaiya. (372)"7
Kesar Singh Chibber cautions against eating dead animals :
“Singh Ji hai, murdar na khee.” (Bansawalinama)
(iv) Prohibition Of Adultery: Gara Gobind Singh banned adultery. Sex within marriage is allowed,
but any other sexual activity is prohibited. He wrote in Bachittar Natak :
“Par nari ki sej, supne mool mut jaeeo.”
(Do not even in a dream visit the bed of another woman).
When asked by the Sikh soldiers whether they could take female enemy prisoners as booty as the
Muslim soldiers did, Guru Gobind Singh told them not to retaliate, for he wanted the Sikhs to set a good
example. Kazi Noor Mohammed, one of the Muslim chroniclers of Ahmed Shah Durrani, who accompanied
Abdali during three of his invasions of India, wrote approvingly about the high moral character of the Sikh
soldiers in their treatment of the women of the opponents. When Jahan Khan’s army was defeated by Sikh
troops, he ran away and left his female retainers. These women were escorted to their homes by the Sikhs
soon after the battle.'8 Desa Singh wrote in his Rabitnama :
“Par beti ko beti jano, par istri ko mat bakhano
Alpnee istri so rat hoee, rahatwant Singh hai soee.” (13)!9
Bhai Nandlal also confirms the ban on adultery :
“Par istri siu neh lagavat, Gobind Singh vah Sikh na bhavai.”” (22)?°
Bhai Chaupa Singh wrote :
“Par istrian da sung na kare.” (11)
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Besides the above four major &urabits, there are some other lapses which attract tankhah. Some of
them are mentioned in the Rabitnama of Bhai Chaupa Singh; for example gambling, theft, consulting
astrologers, observing omens and superstitions, use of intoxicants, giving and taking of dowry, and following
Hindu rituals. The Tankhahnama of Bhai Nandlal also mentions some of the lapses which the Khalsa should
avoid.*! Some of them pertain to the relations between Sikhs and Muslims.
Dr McLeod objects to some of the points made in the Ra/it which are adverse to the Muslims. He
writes :
“The prominence given in the early ra/it to renunciation of Muslim contacts, as an example, indicates
another major element. In this period of strife, Muslims came to be identified as the prime enemies of the
Khalsa and injunctions which reflect this hostility find their way into the evolving rahit. Some are
subsequently shed or modified as changing circumstances affect attitude towards the rabiz, others survive to
the present day. The clearest of all examples is provided by the ban on /a/a/ meat. Another major precept,
which evidently reflects antagonism towards Muslims, is the strict ban on the use of tobacco.”
These conjectures of McLeod are quite misplaced and contrary to facts. Guru Gobind Singh had not
only good relations with Muslims, but he commanded their respect for his spiritual stature. It speaks volumes
for his godliness that a Muslim saint, Pr Budhu Shah, should be so impressed by the spirit of the Guru’s
mission that he should not only send hundreds of his followers to join the army of the Guru, but two of his
sons should also die fighting for the Guru’s cause. It is a fact of history that the Hindu hill princes, besides
being hostile and inimical to the Guru for his anti-caste crusade, were instrumental in inviting the Mughal
forces to attack the Guru. Muslims like Nabi Khan, Ghani Khan and General Said Khan also admired him.
Even in the Zafarnama, he has not condemned Emperor Aurangzeb, but has only exposed his fanaticism and
cruelty. With regard to halal, the reason for its prohibition to the Sikhs have already been given under the
section of kurahits. McLeod’s other contention that the ban on the use of tobacco for the Sikhs is
antagonistic to the Muslims is unreasonable. Tobacco was smoked by both Hindus and Muslims. It was a
pernicious addiction for all people and was condemned as such. The Guru had created a dynamic community
with a mission and a goal. Tobacco creates laziness, lethargy and disease, and was thus a hurdle in the pursuit
of an active and constructive life by the Panth. The ban on tobacco cannot, thus, be taken as an example of
Sikh hostility to Muslims.
Guru Gobind Singh wanted the Khalsa to follow the Rai strictly. There could be no exception to
it. It is said that he wanted the Sikhs to be vigilant.
“Jab lag Khalsa rahe Niyara, Tab lag tej dio mai sara,
Jab th gahay bipran ki reet, Mai na karo in ki parteet.”
(Sarab Loh Granth)
Bipran-ki-reet implies generally Brahminism or ‘Brahamanvad.’ Some of the things which can be
included under it are listed below :
1) Varna Ashram Dharma, caste ideology, concept of pollution, superiority of Brahmins in society,
and the monopoly of Brahmins for conducting religious and social ceremonies, etc.
it) That Brahmins alone are entitled to charity. The Guru says :
“Sabhna noo kar dan.” (G.G.S., Barah Mah)
iit) Belief in the theory of pollution (s#/ak) at time of birth, death, etc. The Guru says :
“ Sabho sutak bharm hai” (G.GS., p. 472).
tv) Ancestor worship and idol worship along with the ceremonies connected with it.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
(v) Sanctity of cooking and enclosed space (chawka) for it.
(vi) Incarnation, that God assumes human birth.
(vit) Rituals like yagna, sanskar, havan, tap, pilgrimage and fasting.
The Guru rejected all superstitions and taboos :
“ Phoota unda bharam ka, manah bhaiyo pargas,
Kati beree pagah te, Gur Reeni bund khalas” (G.GS., p. 1002)
(Superstition is overcome. The mind is illumined. The shakles are broken, the Guru has liberated
me.)
Penalties: Infringements of the Rabit Maryada or the Sikh Code of Discipline involve penalties, with the
clear intention of reforming the defaulter. The Tankhahnama of Bhai Nandlal and some other Rabitnamas
mention certain penalties for infringements. The penalties differ according to the nature and seriousness of
the lapse of misdemeanour. The infringements of the Rabit Maryada may be classified under three heads,
along with the procedure for punishments :
() Tankhah: Some other lapses are mentioned in the Rabitnamas. Tankhah or the penalty imposed is
the verdict or the decision of the local sangat or congregation after due deliberation and considering the
explanation of the offender. The procedure may be set in motion by any Sikh in the form of a complaint
against the offender. Some of the lapses include taking of dowry, use of intoxicants, associating with anti-
Sikh cults, or some violation of the Sikh Code of Discipline. The sangat may accept the offender’s apology
and/or impose admonition, penitence, some sort of sea (service) like cleaning the shoes, serving in the /angar
or reading of some sacred compositions, or the entire Guru Granth Sahib, and/or a fine. After the offender
has carried out the penitence/punishment, he has to appear before the sangat again, and then Ardas is offered
which restores the penitent to his Sikh status.
(it) Patitism (Apostasy) : This is a serious violation of one or all the four Rarahits done by an
amvitdhari Sikh. These are cutting of hair, eating of a/a/ meat, smoking and adultery. The offender has to
appear before the Panj Praras, render an apology and accept whatever punishment is prescribed by them.
After he has gone through the punishment, he has to appear again before Panj Piaras and take amrit again,
when he is restored to his former status.
(iil) Excommunication : "This is the most serious punishment given for a very grave offence or
misdemeanour which may affect the whole Sikh community. The punishment and penance is awarded by any
of the five Takhts to those accused of grave error or insult to the Khalsa Panth. The Jathedar of the Takht,
who after due consideration of the explanation of the offender, prescribes a severe punishment/penitence of
any kind. After the person has undergone the punishment and penitence, he appears before the Takdt for
restoration to his status as a Sikh.
Authorised Rahit Maryada : The Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee, Amritsar, — An All
India Sikh Institution — constituted a sub-committee in 1936 to consider the formulation of a universal Sikh
Rabit Maryada. As a result, representatives of Sikh Associations and Tak&hts deliberated for a long time and
formulated an authorised version which was published in 1945. The original publication is in Punjabi. Its
English edition is also available.”> This booklet is divided into six sections as under :
I. Sikh Defined
II. Aspects of Sikh Living
III.Gurdwaras, Congregational Etiquette, Rites
IV.Beliefs, Observances, Duties, Taboos and Ceremonies
V. Altruistic Work
VI.Panthic (Corporator Sikh) Life
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
CONCLUSION
The Sikh ideology and ethics have unambiguously been laid down in the Sikh scripture, Guru Granth
Sahib. Similarly, our discussion makes it plain that the injunctions of the Gurus and the Rahitnamas have
clearly specified the rules of Sikh conduct and Maryada. Should at any stage there be need of any clarification
of an issue, the matter can be decided only at the Panthic level, the yardstick** provided being the teachings of
the Gurus enshrined in Guru Granth Sahib.
REFERENCES
1. Sikh Research and Reference Library, Amritsar (Mss) Quoted by Sardar Kirpal Singh in S7kAé
Symbols, Sikh Missionary Society, Southall, U.K., 1971, p. 23.
2. H. McLeod : Evolution of the Sikh Community, p. 18. Also see his book - The Saints, p. 243.
3. Gurmat Parkash, monthly journal, April/May 1980 (S.G.P.C.) Amritsar, p. 158.
4. Ibid., p. 158.
5. Ibid., p. 50.
6. Piara Singh Padam : Rahitname, Patiala, 1974, p. 30.
7. H. McLeod : The Chaupa Singh Rabitnama, Otago Univ. Dunedin, 1987, p. 68.
8. Jodh Singh : Gurmat Nirnae, Ludhiana, p. 291.
9. H. McLeod : op. cit. p. 103.
10. Piara Singh Padam : Rabitname, p. 140.
11. Ibid., p. 68.
12. Gurmat Parkash, op.cit. p. 88.
13. Ibid., p. 88.
14. Gurmat Parkash, op. cit. p. 89.
15. McLeod: op. cit. p. 64.
16. Gurmat Parkash, op. cit. p. 54.
17. McLeod: op. cit. p. 104.
18. Gurmat Parkash op. cit. p. 137.
19. Piara Singh Padam : Rahitname, p. 135.
20. Ibid., p. 46.
21. Ibid., p. 44.
22. K. Schomer & W.H. McLeod : The Saints, Motilal Banarasidass, Delhi, 1987, p. 243.
23. Rahit Maryada, a guide to the Sikh way of life, S.G.P.C., Amritsar.
24. GS. Mansukhani: Aspects of Sikhism, p. 212.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
20
THE CASTE SYSTEM AND SIKHS
JAGJIT SINGH
BACKGROUND
The Sikh social revolution has not drawn the attention it deserves, probably for two main reasons.
Max Weber has differentiated three systems of stratification based on class, status and power; but, prior to his
clarification, economic stratification was “emphasised to the point of neglecting or confusing the role of
other forms of stratification.”! “For revolutions before the middle of the nineteenth century, the search for
class struggle can lead to grave confusion;”? because, “Classes in the Weberian sense clearly emerge out of
market relationships”, and as these market relationships were weak before the growth of capitalism, “these
failed to erupt out of their isolation and reshape whole societies in their image.’ “Today, it is a fashion to
interpret every insurrection, rebellion, or revolt in terms of class conflict. Yet, this is absolutely incorrect
from a historical point of view. This is a firmly established fact : revolts and revolutions prior to the end of
the eighteenth century are really not expressions of the class struggle ...... It is difficult today to understand
that the social issue of exploitation never played an important part in revolts prior to the eighteenth century.”*
Therefore, it is wrong to minimize the Sikh social revolution in the light of later historical developments of
the capitalist era; especially so, because in India, a Chhaturpati King was lower in ‘caste-status’ than his own
priest purobita, who was economically dependent on the prince, and the wealthiest Bania was lower in ‘caste-
status’ than the poorest Kshatriya. In short, caste circumscribed the limits within which Indian social, political
and economic activities were to flow, and also set the direction these were to follow.
The second reason is that, even within the feudal set-up, the social and political context differed from
society to society. Islam was lucky that it had to encounter at its birth primitive heathenic beliefs which it was
easier to pierce than the hard shell of the elaborate dogma and religious philosophy (Varna Ashrama Dharma),
the caste in India had spun around itself. Moreover, the Arabian society at that time was quite close to the
level of primitive communism.’ The Sikh movement, on the other hand, had to face the uphill task of
overcoming not only caste, but an elaborate caste system.
THE CASTE AND THE CASTE SYSTEM
A good deal of misunderstanding is caused by confusing caste, as such, elements of which are
present in most societies, with the caste system, which developed in India alone. We have to emphasise this
distinction because it is vital to the clarification of our subject.
“The laws of the Anglo-Saxons laid down that none was to seek in marriage a mate outside one’s
class ...... Well-marked status-groups within a society, distinguished from one another by rights and
disabilities, separated from one another by the absence of freedom of inter-marriage, may, therefore, be
considered to be a common characteristic of the mental background and social picture of the Indo-European
cultures.” “Neither race, nor occupation or function is by itself enough to cause a caste system to come into
being, or to account for its restrictions on commensality and marriage.’ Hereditary functionalism does not
constitute caste.®
It is very important, therefore, to understand that elements of caste exclusiveness, common to many
other societies, assumed special significance in India only because these got welded into a system that gave
them added power, momentum and thrust.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Hutton has given a number of examples where the parallel to the excreableness attached to our
outcastes is very close. In Burma, “pagoda slave is such for life, and his children and descendents are pagoda
slaves in perpetum. If a person, who is not a pagoda slave, marries or be married to a pagoda slave even
unwillingly, such a person and all her or his children, even by a former marriage, also become automatically
pagoda slaves perpetually. Pagoda slaves cannot be employed in any other capacity than that of a pagoda
servant. It will be observed that in the last two respects, the disabilities suffered are even more severe than
those of outcastes in India, though the element of untouchability is not stressed at all to the same degtee.’””? In
Japan, “So strong is the prejudice against them (Eta) that they were considered sub-human ...... lived in
separate quarters in the village; had to wear distinct dress; could only marry among themselves; had no social
intercourse with other classes, and could go abroad between sunset and sunrise ......”!9
What is pertinent to our purpose in these examples is that although there was common ground in
these countries and in India for the origin of caste, in India alone it developed into an organic structure
covering the whole society. In other countries, elements of even extreme social exclusiveness (such as in the
case of pagoda slaves and Eta) became stabilized in an undeveloped form, or even degenerated, so as to affect
only a limited part of society, leaving the main body of the people untouched. “For, the Burmese as a whole
are as free from the working of the caste system as are other peoples among whom analogous institutions
have been pointed out.”!! In India alone, the elements of caste exclustveness developed into an elaborate
system covering the whole society.
A system is qualitatively different from a casual or unmotivated get-together or assortment of factors
or forces. It is what distinguishes philosophy, religion or science from an unintegrated mass of doctrines,
tenets or data. It is what distinguishes an army from a rabble, as it involves organization, arrangement,
method and well-thought out principles of procedure. Above all, a system assumes a purpose, an objective, a
direction, a plan, towards the fulfilment of which the functioning of the different constituents of the system is
coordinated and harmonized. Moreover, a system acquires its own cumulative power, thrust, momentum and
grip.
Why the caste system developed in India and no where else is a complicated question not easy to
answer. But, broadly speaking other societies lacked an elaborate caste ideology and a human agency which
could harness the functioning of the different caste elements towards a set purpose and a fixed direction. In
India, the Brahmin Lavite caste was consciously committed and devoted to the preservation of primarily its
own ‘caste-status’ and, to a lesser degree, that of other ‘twice-born’ castes. Towards that end, economic
status was lowered than ‘caste-status’, and political power was made subservient to the Brahmin priesthood.”
The preservation of the caste order, based on ‘caste-status’, became the overriding compulsion of the caste
society to such an extent that all liberal and egalitarian socio-religious values and trends were either engulfed
in the caste ideology, or so distorted as to blunt their liberal import.'
THREE PILLARS OF THE CASTE SYSTEM
There are three main factors responsible for constituting and consolidating the castes into the Indian
caste system, namely, the caste ideology, Brahmins, and the caste-society.
The fundamental assumption of the caste ideology is that “Men were not — as for classical
Confucianism — in principle equal, but for ever unequal.”'4 They were so by birth, and some of them “were
as unlike as man and animal.”!5 This ideology of human inequality was sought to be reinforced through a
number of channels, but mainly through the religious sanction of Hindu scriptures, Hindu dharma and the
taboos of pollution.
The Purushua Sukta hymn in the Rig Veda was regarded as a divine ordinance sanctioning the origin of
the four castes.!6 Gita sanctified hereditary functionalism (“Congenital duty, O son of Kunti, though
defective, ought not to be abandoned.”);!’ and Lord Krishna claims himself to be the author of castes.!8 What
is even mote significant is that in the huge corpus of orthodox literature, there is not a single line which
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
specifically condemns the Varna Ashrama Dharma. This scriptural sanction of the Varna Ashrama Dharma and
the castes, bears major responsibility for consolidating the castes; because, “To acknowledge the authority of
the Vedas, as demanded of the Hindu, means jides implicita in a more fundamental sense than that of the
Catholic Church ......”;!9 and “Brahminical and caste power resulted from the inviolability of all sacred law
The concept of Hindu dharma came to be very closely interwoven with the social order of
Brahminism, as the caste became a part and parcel of the Varna Ashrama Dharma, the religiously sanctioned
caste system. The Hindu law books were significantly named as Dharam Shastras. “In contrast to the
orthodox sects, the heresy of theophratries consists in the fact that they tear the individual away from his
ritualistic duties, hence from the duties of the caste of his birth, and thus ignore or destroy his dharma. When
this happens, the Hindu loses caste. And since only through caste one can belong to the Hindu community,
he is lost to it.””2!
The taboos about pollution played the biggest role in extending the range of the caste system and in
projecting it in day to day life. The idea of pollution associated with the effects of childbirth and the monthly
period of women had much to do with the undermining of their social position. The peasants were
downgraded because ploughing involved the killing of worms; and, “The lowest caste strata was considered
to be absolutely defiling and contaminating ...... This stratum comprised services which Hinduism had come
to consider ritually impure; tanning, leather work.”
What we have cited above should be enough to leave no doubt that the caste ideology was altogether
different from the loose bundle or combination of social prejudices such as we meet in other societies. The
caste ideology raised social exclusiveness and hierarchy to the level of a religious principle by stamping it with
the sanction of Hindu scriptures, Shastras, and Hindu dharma, and this was the ideological base on which the
super-structure of the caste system was reared and maintained.
The Brahmins, as a levite caste, were the all-time standing kingpin of the caste system; they were
both its ideologues and the human focal point around which the system revolved. Almost all authorities
agree that practically all the orthodox literature is the work of, or inspired by, the Brahmin hierarchy, and
the Brahmins were its sole interpreters. The Brahmins came to occupy the central position in Hindu society
because caste is essentially a social rank, and the social rank of the castes is determined with reference to the
Brahmins.*> In the political sphere too, : “Whereas in other countries the rivalry between the nobility and the
sacerdotal class generally resulted in the triumph of the temporal power over the spiritual ...... in India reverse
has been the case ...... The supremacy of the Brahmins has now become one of the cardinal doctrines of
Hinduism.’’6
The role of caste ideology and Brahmin levite caste in initiating and consolidating the caste system
has been widely discussed and understood. What we want to emphasise here is the role of the third main
pillar of the caste system, its social frame-work, i.e. the caste society itself.
Although the caste ideology, its codes and rules, were laid down by the Brahmins, the adherence to
these rules and usages was ensured by the caste members of the locality, who knew one another intimately,
through caste councils (Panchayats) or otherwise. The very constitution of the caste society, its every cell, was
built on the principle of social inequality and hierarchy, and the caste society was inexorable in its operational
efficiency to uphold that principle. The irony of it is that “the lower the caste in the social scale, the stronger
its combination and the mote efficient its organization.’’?? In other words, the lower castes were more prone
to tighten their own caste shackles.
To what extent the caste governs every member of the caste is detailed by Wilson, who sums up : “It
(caste) interferes, in short, with all the relations and events of life, and with what precedes and follows life
nates ”28 And, the inexhorable working of the caste mechanism is illustrated by Abbe Dubois, who describes the
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
fate of an ex-communicated man. “It renders him, so to speak, dead to the world. With the loss of caste, he
loses not only his relations and friends, but sometimes even his wife and children, who prefer to abandon him
entirely rather than share his ill-fortune.’’”°
Each salient element of the caste ideology (i.e. caste hierarchy; scriptural sanction; sanctions of Hindu
dharma, titualism, custom and tradition; caste connubial and commensal restrictions; the taboos of pollution;
the theory of Aarma as applied to justify caste, etc.) fastens each and every individual of a sub-caste with its
own ideological strand of human inequality and social exclusiveness. In other words, a member of a sub-
caste was bound down, not by one or two, but by several such ideological bonds or chains. If one keeps in
view how difficult it has been to erase social prejudices even where these were operating as a single factor
(e.g. as colour bar in U.S.A., or as taboos in Burmah and Japan, or as endogamy in class societies), the
improbability of overcoming the multiplicative power of so many different strands of caste ideology, acting in
unison, becomes quite apparent.
What made the problem of the caste system still more intricate and intractable was that this
composite ideology of caste hierarchy and social exclusiveness was fused with every fibre of the social texture
of the caste society. Every individual in the caste society was not only himself entangled by several tentacles
of the caste ideology, but he was fastened to other similarly bound individuals within a sub-caste to form a
rigid horizontal social network. In fact, the caste-bounds were the most predominant, if not the only, social
bonds that united the members of a sub-caste. On top of it, this horizontal social net-work of each sub-caste
was tied vertically, layer upon layer, both ideologically (as the ritual, the ethical code, and the penal code were
all hierarchically graded)*” and organizationally, to other similarly constituted higher and lower sub-castes. In
short, the social fabric of the caste society and the caste ideology were interlocked around each and every
social unit of the caste society. This is what made the caste system synonymous with the Hindu society. In
Risley’s somewhat graphic phrase, the removal of the caste system would be “more than a revolution : it
would resemble the removal of some elemental force like gravitation or molecular attraction.” In any case,
the caste system could not be tackled without tackling the caste society; it was imperative and could not be
bypassed. This perspective is of great importance for understanding the social significance of the Sikh
movement.
THE CASTE SYSTEM AND THE SIKHS IN THE PERIOD OF IDEOLOGICAL
ASCENDENCY
The Sikh movement attacked all the three (and other) pillars of the caste system.
Guru Nank directly condemned caste ideology and called it as the wisdom of the perverse.3! The
Sikh Gurus also rejected the Hindu scriptures;** and, since Guru Arjun established Guru Granth Sahib as the
Sikh scripture, Sikhs have never owned any other. Varna Ashrama dharma was integral part of the Hindu
dharma, but Guru Nanak rejected it and “made dharma perfect by blending the four castes into one.’
Discarding pollution taboos, all the members of the Khalsa Dal (including Rangrettas drawn from outcastes)
dined together, which fact was vouchsafed by two Muslim historians in 1733.3
Although the Brahmins were the third numerous caste in the Punjab, out-numbering all but Jats and
Rajputs,*° there were only about 7,000 Sikh Brahmins in the Census of 1881. Even these Brahmins did not
constitute a priestly class, as it is a well-known fact that the Sikhs have no hereditary levite caste. By
eliminating the Brahminical influence in the Panth, the Sikh society eliminated the human kingpin of the caste
system from within its ranks.
Break from the caste ideology and getting rid of Brahmin levite caste were no doubt vital steps for
undermining the caste system. But, what we want to emphasise is that the greatest hurdle was the social
framework of the caste system, i.e. the caste society. The anti-caste movements could survive only if these
divorced themselves from the caste society.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Max Weber writes “Once established, the assimilative power of Hinduism is so great that it tends
even to integrate social forms considered beyond its religious borders. The religious movements of expressly
anti-Brahminical and anti-caste character that were contrary to one of the fundamentals of Hinduism, have
been in all essentials returned to the caste order ...... Unless the sect is able to abolish the caste system
altogether, instead of simply tearing away some of its members, it becomes, from the stand point of the caste
system, a quasi-guest folk, a kind of confessional guest community in an ambiguous position in the prevailing
Hindu Order.’’’
As the abolition of the system at one stroke could happen only through a miracle, the only practical
way was to form a society outside the caste society and use it as a base for attacking the caste system from
outside. This lesson of Indian history is of the utmost importance for grasping the social significance of the
Sikh movement. The contaminative power of the caste system was so great that it did not spare Indian
Muslims and Christians,3* whom the caste society was not prepared to assimilate even if they wished it. Then,
how could those anti-caste movements, whether be of Lingayats, Chaitanyites, or of other radical Bhakats like
Namdev, Kabir, and other Saints, despite all their radical anti-caste innovations, remained as mere sects of
Hinduism, or as mere appendages of the caste society. None of these came to be enumerated in census
operations as distinctly non-Hindu social units like the Muslims, Christians and Sikhs. It was because these
anti-caste protests did not develop, for one reason or another, into sustained movements which worked
consistently over a period to establish and maintain their separate social identity from the caste society in the
manner the Sikh movement did in the revolutionary period of about 275 years (approximately from 1486
A.D., when Guru Nanak started his mission, to the establishment of the mass/s in 1764). Even the ideological
anti-caste distinctiveness of such movements tended to fade after the inspiration provided by their founders
began to wane after their death, and they became more and more vulnerable to the “assimilative power of
Hinduism.” In other words, mere ideological gap between the caste ideology and the anti-caste ideology of
these movements, howsoever wide, was not enough. The chances of success of any anti-caste movement
were in direct proportion to the extent it established and retained a separate social identity from the caste
society. A very important achievement of the Sikh movement, therefore, is that it marked a clear break from
the caste society.
The Vars of Bhai Gurdas link the creation of the Panth with the abolition of caste and sects.*” A
contemporary Muslim historian of Guru Hargobind (1595-1644) testifies that the “Sikhs do not read the
Mantras (i.e. Vedic or other scriptural hymns) of the Hindus, they do not venerate their temples or idols, nor
do they esteem their avtars.”4° The creation of the Khalsa made the final break with the caste society. For
joining the Khalsa brotherhood, one had to take five solemn vows of Dharam Nash, Kul Nash, Karam Nash,
Bharam Nash and Krit Nash which cut at the roots of the cardinal principles of the caste system.*!
The newswriter of the area sent to the Mughal Emperor a report of the Guru’s address at the time of
the creation of the Khalsa (1699). “Let men of the four castes receive my baptism, eat out of one dish, and
feel no disgust or contempt for one another.” This is also corroborated by the near-contemporary Koer
Singh (1751), who records that the Guru “blended the four castes into one”, had rejected both the Hindu and
Muslim religions and created a new noble Khalsa, wherein Sudra, Vaishya, Khatri and Brahmin eat together.#
The later Sikh literature of the 18th century, written by different persons and at different times, is
agreed on this issue that the Khalsa broke away from the caste ideology and the caste society. Rabitnamas,
which contain mostly precepts, take a very strong line on this issue. “He who abides by the six Darshuas,
drags along with him his whole family into hell.”4+ “If any baptized Sikh puts on Janeo, he will be caste into
hell.”’45 “A Sikh should sever connection with Musalmans and Hindus (Mussalmans Hindu & aan mete).”*
Kesar Singh Chibber (1769) writes that “the Guru created a new Third Panth (Khalsa Panth) by breaking with
both Hindus and Mussalmans.”4” Sukha Singh (1797) states the same fact more explicitly : “Sudra, Vaish,
Khatri and Brahmin all ate together. The religion of Vedas was rejected ...... All the religions of Hindus were
discarded and one pure, ‘Khalsa’ was established.’’48 One Bhai Gurdas Singh wrote about the same time :
“Ved, Puran, six Shastras and Kuran were eliminated ...... The third religion of Khalsa became supreme.”
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
We have already referred to non-Sikh sources of Dabistan and the Mughal newswriter (1699). In order to
appreciate this ‘striking and complete break’ from caste society, we have to remind that no one could be a
Hindu unless he was born Hindu and also not without belonging to one caste or another;5? and that
restrictions on inter-caste commensality were fundamental to the caste system.*!
All the evidence given above belongs to the 17th and 18th centuries. It clearly demonstrates that the
separation of the Khalsa from the caste society was not an accident or an expediency. It was a regular
movement which continued without a break during its revolutionary phase. But, a preposterous proposition
continues to be persistently repeated that the separate identity of the Khalsa from the caste society was a
creation of the Singh Sabha movement in the late 19th and early 20th centuries under the influence of the
divide and rule policy of the British. The Singh Sabha movement was a revival, no doubt, but by no means
an innovation.
A NEW SOCIO-POLITICAL ORDER
The Khalsa not only broke away from the caste society, but also succeeded to a remarkable degree in
giving an egalitarian socio-political orientation to its own polity. This was both an acid test and a proof of its
separate identity from the caste society as well as its raison d'etre.
(a) Social Structure: The unit of the Sikh Panth was sangat (1.c. a congregation of Sikhs) and not sub-
caste or caste. Bhai Gurdas in his ar eleven has given account of some of the prominent sangats of his time,
from which it is clear that almost all the sangats were composed of Sikhs drawn from all castes, including the
Sudras and outcastes, without any distinction.
(b) Mass Base Of The Khalsa: The Khalsa had not only an egalitarian socio-political mission, but it had
also a plebeian composition. This mass base of the Khalsa reinforced the execution of the Khalsa missions as
the downtrodden became both the architects and masters of their own destiny.
The plebeian base of the Khalsa is testified to by Sikh historical literature.52 Non-Sikh sources of
history also confirm that scavengers, leather-dressers, and such like persons were very numerous among
Banda’s forces.*? The mass base of the Panth continued even in the later period.
(c) The Spirit Of Equality, Brotherhood And Fraternization: More than the form or its composition, it is
the spirit which prevails within a movement which reflects its real character. The prevalence of the spirit of
equality, brotherhood and fraternization is attested to by Sikh sources of history,°° and is confirmed by
Ghulam Mohyy-ud-Din (1722-23), who writes that the low caste Hindus swelled the ranks of Banda, and
everyone in his army “would address the other as the adopted son of the oppressed Guru (Guru Gobind
Singh) and would publicize himself with the title of sahibzada.”>°
(d) Political Power: The Sikh movement not only raised the social status of the people drawn from the
lower castes into the Panth, but also shared political power with them. There cannot be a permanent footing
for a social revolution without a corresponding political set up.°’ The Khalsa shared political power with
scavengers and leather dressers, “the lowest of low in Indian estimation”, under Banda.5* Even in the ms/
period, ordinary peasants, village menials (Jassa Singh Ramegarhia), and distillers (Jassa Singh Ahluwalia),
whom the caste society rated very near the outcastes, became the leaders. What is even more significant is
that there was no one else from castes higher than these. “...... the whole country of the Punjab ...... is in the
possession of this community (the Khalsa) and most of their exalted leaders are of low origin, such as
carpenters, animal-skin treaters and Jats.”5? As against it, “None of the revolutions (English, American,
French or Russian) quite substituted a brand new ruling class for the old one, atleast not unless one thinks of
a class without bothering about the human beings who make up the class ......”"
The capture of political power by the commoners had a great social impact. It was on this account
that the Sikhs in general (drawn from all castes) have come to be addressed as Sardars upto this day by the
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
non-Sikhs. It was the taste of political power which made the Sikh Jat feel prouder than the Rajput,®! and the
Ramgarhias (Carpenters) and Ahluwalias (distillers) feel as equals to the Jat.
THE CASTE SYSTEM AND THE SIKHS IN THE LATER PERIOD
“It would also seem that most men cannot long stand the strain of prolonged effort to live in
accordance with very high ideals ...... Thermidot (i.e. return to less hectic time) comes as naturally to societies
in revolution as an ebbing tide, as calm after a storm, as convalescence after fever, as the snapping back of a
stretched elastic band.’
This slide towards Thermidor, common to all revolutions, was compounded in the case of the Sikh
movement by another development. The Sikh Panth had no sectarian, ethnic, or regional loyalty as a base of
its own. With the exception of stray Muslims, all its recruits came from those Hindus who were drawn
towards it by its ideological appeal; and, who were, in addition, during the period of the revolutionary
struggle, prepared to suffer for its practical fulfilment. The number of Khalsa guerillas was for this reason, at
one stage, reduced to about 2,000 persons. Thus the ideologically qualitative content of the movement
during the revolutionary phase came to be regulated so to say, automatically. But, with the prospects of
political power in sight, the number of Singhs suddenly rose, as estimated by Khushwaqt Rai in 1811, to be
about 200,000. It is said that this number swelled further during the rq of Ranjit Singh, but what can be said
for certain is that the number of Sikhs increased a good deal in the British period. Between 1881 and 1931,
the total number of Sikhs increased from 1,853,426 to 4,33,771.% As such, conversions were, by and large,
not so much a matter of conviction as of convenience, these proselytes retained in varying degrees some
elements of their heritage from their previous connection with the caste system. What is of consequence,
therefore, for our study in this background is to examine in what manner, or to what extent, the revolutionary
heritage of the Panth has affected the abolition or retention of the caste heritage of these proselytes at various
levels of the Sikh society during the modern period, about which alone we have authentic information
regarding the post-revolutionary period.
(a) At The Panthic Level: (i) At the Panthic level, there is no discrimination agaisnt Sikhs drawn from
any caste. Sikhs from the outcastes have been the priests (granthies) of Harimandar Sahib, Amritsar, the most
sacred place to the Sikhs; and, by an unwritten convention, vice-Presidents of S.G.P.C. (the constitutional
body which controls all the major historic Gurdwaras in the Punjab) have been elected from Sikhs drawn
from the outcastes. As against this, the Shankracharya has publicly declared very recently that free entry of
Sudras into the premier Hindu temples would lead to the destruction of Hinduism.
The institution of agar (as distinct from taking prasad in a temple) has been a very important factor
in keeping alive, at the Panthic level, the anti-caste heritage of the earlier period. In the /angars attached to the
gurdwaras and at the time of Jor Me/as (Sikh religious gatherings), Sikhs drawn from all castes, including the
outcastes, dine together and no body bothers by whom the food is cooked or served. This fact can be
verified at any time. But “it is one of the constitutive principles of the castes that there should be atleast
ritually inviolable barriers against complete commensalism among different castes.’
(it) Jat Sikhs Vis-a-vis Khatri Sikhs, Arora Sikhs And Ramgarhia Sikhs : These categories do not
constitute a hierarchy, as is wrongly supposed, atleast in the Brahminical sense. A hierarchy pre-supposes
fixation of higher and lower grades, and, what is more, their acceptance by the categories concerned
voluntarily or otherwise. As a consequence of the Sikh Revolution, the Jat Sikhs do not recognise anybody as
their social superiors;® on the other hand, “Khatri Sikhs probably considred themselves above the Jat Sikhs
in status.” This apparent contradiction in these two statements is resolved if one faces the reality that none
of the two groups regards itself as inferior to the other — the Jat Sikh because of the elevation of his social
position by the Sikh Revolution, and the Khatri Sikh because of his wealth, education and the lingering
consciousness that the Jats had once been his inferiors in the caste hierarchy. In this respect, we bracket the
Arora Sikhs with Khatri Sikhs, as the former claim Khatri origin and are socially, more or less, similarly
placed.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Similarly, ever since the formation of Ramgarhia mis/, the Ramgarhia Sikhs have regarded themselves
as peers to the Jat Sikhs; and their recently acquired phenomenal prosperity,’”” as compared to the Jat Sikhs,
has added to their pride and social status. Ramgarhia Sikhs have never been denied access to gurdwaras, but
sometimes they build their own just to assert their independent status. In short, the Ramgarhia Sikhs do not
accept at all that the Jat Sikhs are superior to them.
Ramgarhia Sikhs are not, as wrongly alleged, a sub-caste of Tarkhan Sikhs, because there are no
commensal or connubial barriers between the two as evidenced by extensive family ties between them. Any
Tarkhan Sikh, who leaves his village surroundings and chooses to call himself a Ramgarhia, automatically
becomes one.
There are, therefore, no grounds for inferring that the Jat Sikhs, Khatri Sikhs, Arora Sikhs and
Ramgarhia Sikhs constitute a hierarchy, because stratification “implies that a zero-sum of I-win-you-lose
relationship exists between higher and lower strata.”’’! In no case do they constitute a hierarchy in the
Brahminical sense; as they freely interdine, and whatever inhibitions there might be regarding intermarriages
between them, belong to the type of group prejudices common to most societies, as there are absolutely no
religious or ritual barriers.
(iil) Artisans And Menials : Out of a total of 1,853,426 Sikhs in 1881, the number of artisan and menial
castes among the Sikhs, other than the Tarkhans, was Lohar Sikhs 24,614; Jhinwar Sikhs 21,754; Nai Sikhs
21,500; Chimba Sikhs 17,748; Sunar Sikhs 14,046; Kumhar Sikhs 11,947, and Kalal Sikhs 8,931.7? In other
words these categories do not constitute any caste problem of major social significance. Of these, Kalal
Sikhs, although assigned a lower position than most of the artisan castes, raised their social status
considerably, like the Ramgarhia Sikhs, by capturing political power when they formed the Ahluwalia mis/.
Since then they have taken to service, primarily in the army and the police,” and have shaken off their
dependence upon any social hierarchy. The other artisan castes of the Sikhs migrated to the cities in large
numbers,’* where, being in small numbers and being widely dispersed, they can hardly be treated as compact
groups. In the villages, too, they are similarly dispersed. As already noted, Sikhs derived from all castes,
excepting the Mazhbis, interdine. Therefore, the Sikhs from artisans and menial categories face no social
discrimination excepting that they find reluctance on the part of Jat, Khatri, Arora and Ramgarhia Sikhs to
intermarry with them. Such intermarriages are not so common, but they are not insignificant either, the
writer himself having attended such marriage ceremonies on a number of occasions. The important point to
note, however, is that intermarriages are prevented by sentiment and not by hard and fast rules. “Marriages
outside the class in Europe might be rare and invalid, but in India, if it is contracted outside the caste, it is a
sactilege.”’’5 Such martiages are neither a sacrilege in the Sikh society, nor are these visited by penalties such as
those imposed by the caste ideology.
(b) At The Village Level: It is at the village level that we find remnants of the social hierarchy
operating among the Sikhs, as it does, more or less on similar lines, in Muslim villages. In both cases, the
peasantry, whether Jat, Baloch or Pathan, is at the top of the hierarchy, and the artisans and menials are
arranged in different lower grades, though under different labels in some cases (e.g. Mashki for Jhiwar, Mochi
for Chamar, and Mussali for Chuhra). Our subject is confined to the position of the Sikhs vis-a-vis the
Indian caste system, but it is pertinent to point out that most of the artisans and menials got coverted to
Islam long ago under the Muslim rule and their social and occupational status remains much the same as it
was before conversion. This fact suggests two important implications. One, that the social hierarchy in the
village hierarchy could not be overhauled during the long impact of Islam and Muslim rule, it is too much to
expect drastic changes in the hierarchy of Sikh villages which embraced Sikhism at a very late date during the
post-revolutionary period.
To come to our main thesis, let us find out in what respects and how far the social gradings in the
Sikh village compare with the corresponding hierarchy of the Indian caste system. The very fact that quite a
large number of Sudras and outcastes left Hindu ranks and embraced Sikhism during the British period (when
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
there could be no political pressure by the Sikhs) shows that there was a clear advantage in doing so.
“Between 1901 and 1911 there were large scale conversions to Sikhism among the chuhbras and chamars.
Hinduism lost some 151,806 chuhras and 189,103 chamars in this period.’’”6
Chimba Sikhs, Jhiwar Sikhs and Labana Sikhs (all from exterior castes) had hypergamous relations
with their Hindu counterparts,” and the practice of this hypergamy was a step for breaking off from the
patent castes.’* Hutton points to the low position of the Dhobis and Chimbas who washed clothes.” The fact
that a washerman’s pursuit brings him into contact with menstrually polluted clothes is enough to make him
an outcaste no less than the scavenger who removed night soil or dead bodies.8° The Sikh Chimbas are not at
all treated as out-castes. In another important field, the Sikhs from artisan castes have clearly improved their
social position in the villages, because all the Sikhs in the village, except the Mazhabis, interdine.*! Secondly,
the Sikh Jats have hypergamous relations with the lower castes of the village. These are two basic departures
from the two ‘Constitutive principles’ of the Indian caste system. Also, these Sikhs share religious equality
with the Jat Sikhs, whether in the village or outside it. The granthi in the village gurdwara, from whatever
caste drawn, whether Mazhbi or any other, is respected as much as any granthi drawn from whatever level of
society.
These facts are enough to show that the Sikhs from artisan and menial castes have travelled a long
distance away from the corresponding social position of their counterparts in the caste-society.
The real tough problem at the village level is that of Chamar and Mazhabi Sikhs. We do not want to
minimise that this problem is the darkest social blot on the Sikh society, but for the sake of our comparative
study we have to point out : “No Miasma of touch pollution is attributed to them (.e. Mazhabi Sikhs drawn
from the sweeper caste).’’®? This is a major advance from the position of the Hindu untouchables (among
whom Hutton counts chamar, dhobi, dom and sweeper castes) in the caste society, where, “Some castes
themselves low are especially strict in keeping untouchables at a distance ......”8> But, the greatest advantage to
these castes is that since Sikhism rejects the Hindu system of Varn Ashram Dharma, there is no religious
prejudice, or bar against their moral, religious or spiritual progress. This is evidenced by the fact that Sudra
Saints, whose bani (hymns) is in Guru Granth Sahib are as much respected as the Sikh Gurus and a Sudra
granthi ot President of the S.G.P.C. or the Jathedar (head) of the Akal Takhat has the same authority and
commands the same respect among the Sikhs as any other Sikh granthi, President or Jathedar.
“They (Mazhabi Sikhs) sit among others in the temple.”*+ On the other hand, we have already
mentioned Shankracharya’s public declaration that the free entry of Sudras in the premier Hindu temples
would lead to the destruction of Hinduism.
“All Sikh Jats, excepting the Mazhabis, interdine.”® Since I.P. Singh conducted his investigations in
1959, 1961, we have not come across any other scientific sociological field study on this subject, but it is a
widely held opinion that the commensal prejudice against the Mazhabi Sikh among the Sikh Jats in the
villages has almost disappeared. Secondly, the reluctance of the Sikh Jats to dine with the Mazhabi Sikhs in
their own village, although they do so knowingly at the /angars, appears to be more a question of maintaining
their social prestige in the locality, rather than, unlike the caste society, of ritual taboos sanctified by the Varna
Asshrama Dharma. "Thirdly, there is readiness among Jat Sikhs to accept Mazhabi brides.8* This automatically
means preparedness to abrogate commensal barriers with respect to atleast their Mazhabi brides, and this fact
further supports the view we have expressed above.
The Ramdasias or the Sikh Chamars “occupy a much higher position than the Hindu Chamar.”®’ The
workers in leather (Chamars) “are looked upon in detestation by orthodox Hindus” and the sweepers are
“regarded as the very dregs of impurity.”88 Marenco points out that the Chamar and Chuhra Sikhs had more
literates than the Chamar and Chuhra Hindus;*? and “the Chuhra Sikhs were more frequent in dropping their
traditional occupation than the Chuhra Muslims or the Chuhra Hindus.” “The Chuhra Hindu occupies the
lowest place in the social scale. He was avoided by all, and his touch was considered as pollution. When
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
converted to Sikhism, he was still a village menial but he was no longer the remover of night soil. By taking
the Pahul (baptism), the Chuhra convert might change his standing in the hierarchy.””!
CONCLUSION
The revolutionary and post-revolutionary phases of a revolution are two differently motivated
periods. In the former case, “virtue was the order of the day.”°? Whereas in the latter period what prevails is
“self-seeking at the expense of revolutionary idealism.’*> Therefore, these two periods should not be so
confused as to judge one in the light of the other.
The anti-caste achievements of the Sikh movement during the period of the Gurus and the Khalsa
Dal stand out in bold relief. No Indian movement succeded, to the extent the Sikh revolution did, in making
the Khatries, Aroras, Jats, artisans, village menials and the outcastes (Chamars and sweepers), forego their
caste hierarchy and merge on equal terms into a genuine brotherhood of the Khalsa; or shared political power
with ‘the lowest of low in Indian estimation’, as was done under Banda; or enabled the Jat (on the border line
of Vaisyas and Sudras) to regard his social status as higher than that of the Brahmin and the Rajput; or raised
Jats, shepherds, artisans (carpenters) and the despised caste of Kalals to be the rulers of the land. These
achievements compare favourably even on the world map, if it is kept in view that the social stigma attached
to the Sudras and the outcastes in the Indian society was far worse than that from which the Negroes in the
U.S.A. or the slaves suffered elsewhere.
As regards the post-revolutionary period, any assessment of the problem of caste vis-a-vis the Sikhs
would remain lopsided unless viewed in the proper perspective. Owing to human failings and environmental
hurdles, the progress of human society in terms of its ideological aspirations has been so slow and
inperceptible™ that many sceptics doubt whether there has been any transformation of human motivation at
all.°5 Hence, it is the overall contribution, even if small, which a revolutionary movement makes towards
humanitarian progress that matters more than its shortcomings. The social discrimination against the
Negroes prevailing in the U.S.A. should not blind us to the ennobling spirit of Christianity that opened a new
chapter in the political liberation of Negroes there. Though slaves survived in the Muslim world, but one
must not on that account overlook one of the greatest egalitarian social revolutions in the history of the world
brought about by Islam. For a similar reason, it is no mean achievement of the Sikh Revolution that the Sikh
Panth, despite all the counter-revolutionary forces at work in the post-revolutionary period, remains cut off
from the most rigid social system known to mankind. All other Indian radical movements have reverted, or
have remained as appendages, to the caste society, and hence to the caste system.
Secondly, the residuary progress that revolutionary movements leave behind is so impalpable that it is
measurable only in comparative terms and not by absolute standards. Whereas the Hindu temples and Maths
are the strongholds of the caste ideology and practices, there are no religious, commensal, or other social
discriminations at the Panthic level. At the village level too, the Sikhs drawn from artisan, menial and outcaste
categories are decidedly well-placed socially when compared to their counterparts in the caste society. These
contrasts are, indeed, significant.
REFERENCES
Hagopian, Mark N. : The Phenomenon of Revolution, p. 52.
Ibid., p. 83.
Ibid., p. 81.
Ellul, Jacques : Autopsy of Revolution, pp. 17-22.
Nizami, Khaliq Ahmed : Some Aspects of Religion and Politics in India during the Thirteenth Century, p. 15.
Ghurye, G.S. : Caste and Race in India, pp. 157-159.
Hutton, J.H. : Caste in India, p. 173.
Ibid., p. 139.
OO Oe ane
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
9. Ibid., p. 144.
10. Ibid., p. 147.
11. Ibid., p. 147.
12. Ghurye, pp. 57-58, 90-91; Max Weber : The Refigion of India, p. 60.
13. The Sikh Revolution, Chap. V.
14. Max Weber, p. 144.
15. Ibid.
16. Ya’jnik, J.U. : J.R.A.S.B. (1872), pp. 100-12; Phear, I.A. (1875).
17. Bhagavadgita, XVHI, 48.
18. Ibid., IV, 13; Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan : The History and Culture of the Indian People, Vol. Il, p. 441.
19. Max Weber, p. 28.
20. Ibid., p. 48.
21. Ibid., p. 24.
22. Senart, Emile : Caste in India, p. 69.
23. Max Weber, p. 100.
24. Crooke, W.: E.R.E., Vol. 6, p. 695.
25. Max Weber, p. 30; Senart, pp. 18-19.
26. Gait, E.A.: E.RE,, Vol. 3, p. 236.
27. Hutton, p. 99; Gait, E.R.E., Vol. 3, p. 239.
28. Quoted by Hutton, pp. 90-91.
29. Quoted by Senart, p. 71.
30. Max Weber, p. 144; Crooke W. : E.R.E., Vol. 6, p. 712; Bannerji P. : Journal of Asiastic Society,
Vol. XIX (1953).
31. Macauliffe, Max Arthur : The Sikh Religion, 1, p. 379.
32. Ibid., p. 310.
33. Bhai Gurdas, Var One, Pauries, 23, 25; Var 23, Pauries, 19, 20.
34. Bhangu, Rattan Singh : Prachin Panth Parkash, pp. 202, 216, 436.
35. Siyar-ul-Mutakbharin, trans, by John Briggs, p. 73; Haqiqat, Indian Historical Quarterly, March 1942,
sup. p. 5.
36. Ibbetson, Sir Denzil : Punjab Castes, Sec. 512.
37. Max Weber, pp. 18-19.
38. Gait, EA.: E.RE,, Vol. 3, p. 239; Hutton, p. 121.
39. Var 23, Pauri 19.
40. Dabistan trans. by Ganda Singh : The Panjab Past and Present (1969), p. 51.
41. Hari Ram Gupta : History of the Sikh Gurus, p. 189.
42. Macauliffe, V, pp. 93-94.
43. Koer Singh : Guarbilas Patshahi Das, p. 1306.
44, (Prahlad Singh), Rehatnama, edited by Piara Singh Padam, p. 55.
45. Rebatnama (Daya Singh), p. 64.
46. Ibid.
47. Parakh (Panjab University, Chandigarh), Vol. 11 (1972).
48. Sukha Singh : Garbilas, p. 133.
49. Varan Bhai Gurdas, Var 41.
50. Max Weber, p. 29.
51. Max Weber, p. 36.
52. Koer Singh, p. 90; Bhangu, pp. 50, 58, 104, 236, 244, 262, 268, 368, 469.
53. Irvine, William : Later Mughals, pp. 94, 96, 98-99; Fatuhat Name-i-Sandi, p. 28; Asrar-i-Sandi, trans.
in Punjabi, p. 7; Haqiqat, p. 6; Khafi Khan, Exot ¢& Dowson, Vol. vii, pp. 419-420; Haqigat,
LH.Q., March 1942, sup., p. 6.
54. Ganda Singh : Early European Accounts of the Sikhs, (Folier, 1780), p. 192.
55. Mehma Parkash, I, p. 136; Bhangu, pp. 212, 261, 436, 86, 215.
56. Cited by Gurbax Singh, Punjab History Conference (Dec. 1973), Proceedings, pp. 55-56.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
57. Hagopian, Mark N : The Phenomenon of Revolution, p. 51.
58. Irvine, pp. 98-99.
59. Syed Ghulam Ali Khan : Imdad Saadat, p. 71.
60. Brinton, p. 270.
61. Ibbetson, Sir Denzil : Punjab Castes, Sec. 437.
62. The terms such as “Jat Sikhs”, “Khatri Sikh’, “Mazhabi Sikhs”, etc. are invalid according to
Sikhism, but we are using them for the sake of brevity and should be taken to mean Sikhs
drawn from such castes.
63. Brinton, Crane : The Anatomy of Revolution, p. 224.
64. Hagigat, \.H.Q. (1942), Sup., p.17.
65. Tarikh-i-Punjab-i-Sikhan, pp. 63-64.
66. Marenco, E.K. : The Transformation of Sikh Society, p. 140.
67. Max Weber, p. 36.
68. Marenco, E.K. : op. cit., p. 121.
69. Ibid., p. 114.
70. Marenco, p. 172.
71. Hagapian, p. 79.
72. Matrenco, pp. 176-77.
73. Ibid., pp. 200-204.
74. Ibid., p. 89.
75. Ketkar, S.V. : Hastory of the Caste in India, p. 117.
76. Marenco, p. 256.
77. Ibid., pp. 210, 273.
78. Ibid., p. 273.
79. Hutton, p. 129.
80. Ibid.
81. LP. Singh, cited by Mandebaum, D.G. : Society of India, UW, pp. 539-543.
82. Ibid., I, pp.539-543.
83. Bingley, A.H.: History, Caste and Culture of Jats and Guyars, p. 102.
84. LP. Singh, op. cit.
85. I.P. Singh, op. cit., pp. 539-43.
86. Ibid.
87. Ibbetson, p. 300.
88. Crooke, W. : The North-Western Provinces of India, etc., p. 200.
89. Marenco, p. 279.
90. Ibid., pp. 285-286.
91. Ibid., p. 130.
92. Brinton, Crane : The Anatomy of Revolution, pp. 199, 207.
93. Hagopian, pp. 228-230; Brinton, pp. 233-44.
94. Brinton, pp. 209, 271.
95. Ibid., pp. 290-91.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
21
GURU GRANTH SAHIB — GURU ETERNAL FOR SIKHS
HARBANS SINGH
Guru Granth Sahib — some of the variations on the title being Aad Granth, Sri Aad Granth or Aad
Sti Guru Granth Sahib — is the religious Scripture of the Sikhs as well as Guru Eternal for them. The basic
word in the expressions listed is granth meaning a book, sabib and sri being honorifics, guru indicating its status
as successor in the guruship after Guru Gobind Singh and aad, literally original, first or primary.
Guru Granth Sahib is an anthology of the sacred compositions of the Gurus and of some of the
medieval Indian saints. The latter came from a variety of class and creedal background — Hindu as well as
Muslim, high-caste as well as low-caste. One criterion for choosing their verses for Guru Granth Sahib
apparently was its tone of harmony with the teachings of the Gurus. The anthology was prepared by Guru
Asjun, the fifth Guru, in 1603-4. To it were added by Guru Gobind Singh, the tenth Guru, the compositions
of Guru Tegh Bahadur, the ninth Guru.
Even before the time of Guru Arjun, pothis or books in Gurmukhi characters existed containing the
holy utterances of the Gurus. A line in Bhai Gurdas, Var 1.32 suggests that Guru Nanak during his travels
cartied under his arm a book, evidently comprising his own compositions. According to the Pyratan
Janamsakhi, he handed over such a manuscript to Guru Angad as he passed on the spiritual office to him.
Two of the collections of hymns, or pofhis are still extant. They are in the possession of the descendants of
Guru Amar Das. One of the families in the line lives at Pinjore and the posh it has inherited is on view for
the devotees in their home on the morning of the full moon day every month. A collateral family, which is in
possession of the second po/hi, lives in the village of Darapur in Hoshiarpur district of the Punjab.
The bani, or word revealed, was held in great veneration by the Sikhs even before Guru Granth was
compiled. It was equated with the Guru himself. “The bani is the Guru and the Guru is bani,’ sang Guru
Ram Das in Rag Nat Narain. The bani echoed the Divine Truth; it was the voice of God — “the Lord’s own
word”, as said Guru Nanak in Guru Granth Sahib. Guru Amar Das says :
Vahu, vahu bani nirankar hai,
tis jevad avar na koe
Hail Hail, the word of the Guru, which is the Formless Lord Himself,
There is none other, nothing else to be reckoned equal to it.
The compilation of the Aad Granth, a momentous event in Sikh history, is generally described in the
briefest terms. The Sacred Volume was prepared by Guru Arjun (A.D. 1563-1606) and the first copy was
calligraphed by Bhai Gurdas (1551-1636) at his dictation — this is all we learn from most of our sources.
The amount of planning, minute attention to detail and diligent and meticulous work it involved is slurred
over. An old text which gives some detailed information is the Gurbilas Chhevin Patshahi. Written in A.D.
1718, this, in fact, is the oldest source. Although it does not go into the technical and literary minutiae, it
narrates the entire process from the beginning of the transcription of the Aad Granth to its installation in the
newly-built Harimandar at Amritsar.
Why Guru Arjun undertook the task is variously explained. One commonly accepted assumption is
that the codification of the Gurus’ compositions into an authorized volume was begun by him with a view to
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
preserving them from garbling by schismatic groups and others. According to the Mahima Prakash (A.D.
1776), he set to work with the announcement : “As the Panth (Community) has been revealed unto the world,
so must there be the Granth (Book), too.” By accumulating the canon, Guru Arjun wished to affix the seal
on the sacred word. It was also to be the perennial fountain of inspiration and the means of self-perpetuation
for the community.
Guru Arjun called Bhai Gurdas to his presence and expressed to him the wish that the composition
of the Gurus as well as those of some of the saints and sufis be collected. Messages were sent to the disciples
to gather and transmit to him the hymns of his predecessots.
To quote the Gwrbilas again, an attractive spot in the thick of a forest on the outskirts of Amritsar
was marked out by Guru Arjun. So dense was the foliage that not even a moonbeam could pry into it. The
site was peaceful and picturesque. A tent was hoisted in this idyllic setting. Here Guru Arjun and Bhai
Gurdas started work on the sacred volume.
The making of the Granth was no easy task. It involved sustained labour and a rigorous intellectual
discipline. Selections had to be made from a vast amount of material. Besides the compositions of the four
preceding Gurus and of Guru Arjun, who himself was a poet with a rare spiritual insight, there were songs
and hymns by saints, both Hindu and Muslim. What was genuine had to be sifted from what was counterfeit.
Then the selected material had to be assigned to appropriate musical measures and transcribed in a minutely
laid out order.
Guru Arjun carried out the work with extraordinary exactness. He arranged the hymns in thirty
different ragas, or musical patterns. A precise method was followed in setting down the compositions. First
came shabads by the Gurus in the order of their succession. Then came chhands, vars, and other poetic forms
in a set order. The compositions of the Gurus in each raga were followed by those of the bhakias in the same
format. Gurmukhi was the script used for the transcription.
According to Bhai Gurdas’ testimony, the text had been transcribed by Bhadon Vadi Ekam 1661
B.K. At the head of the index he recorded : “Sammat 1661 miti bhadon vadi ekam pothi likh pahuche”, t.e., on
Bhadon Vadi Ekam 1661 he had reached this spot where the index was to begin after completing the writing
of the book. The index, giving the opening words of each shabad or hymn and its pagination, is itself a marvel
of scholarly fastidiousness. A genius, unique in spiritual intuition and not unconcerned with methodological
design, had created a scripture with an exalted mystical tone and a high degree of organization. It was large in
size — nearly 7,000 hymns, comprising compositions of the first five Sikh Gurus and fifteen bhakfas and sujis
from different parts of India, including Shaikh Farid, Kabir and Ravidas. The Sacred Volume consisted of
974 leaves, or 1948 pages, 12"x8", with several blank ones at the end of a raga when there were not shabads
enough to fill the section assigned to it. The site of these marvellous labours is now marked by a shrine called
Ramsat.
The completion of the Granth Sahib was, says the Gurbilas, celebrated with much jubilation. In
thanksgiving, Aarabprasad was prepared in huge quantities. Sikhs came in large numbers to see the Aad
Granth. They were rejoiced in their hearts by the sight of it and bowed before it in veneration. The Guru
enjoined the Sikhs to own the Granth equal with the Guru and make no distinction between the two. “He
who wishes to see the Guru, let him see the Granth. He who seeks the Guru’s word, let him read the Granth
with love and attention.”
Guru Arjun asked the Sikhs where the Granth Sahib should be installed. Bhai Budha spoke, “You
are omniscient, Master. But there is no place more suitable than the Harimandar.” The Guru was happy to
hear these words “like one who has sighted the new moon.” He then recited the praise of the Harimandat :
“There is nothing like it in all the world. Harimandar is like the ship — the means for the people to cross
over the worldly ocean triumphantly. A new joy pervades here every day. A sight of it annuls all sins.”
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
It was decided to spend the night at Ramsar and return to Amritsar the next morning. The Granth
Sahib rested on a seat under the canopy, whereas the Guru and the Sikhs slept on the ground.
A disciple had to be chosen to take charge of the Granth Sahib. As says the Gurbilas, Guru Arjun lay
awake through the night reflecting on the question. His choice finally fell on Bhai Budha whose devotion
was universally applauded. As they awoke, the Guru and his Sikhs made ablutions in Ramsar. The former
thereupon practised his wonted meditation. At dawn, the entire sangat marched towards Harimandar. Bhai
Budha carried the Aad Granth on his head and Guru Arjun walked behind swinging the chaur over it.
Musicians sang shabads. Thus they reached the Harimandar. The Granth Sahib was ceremonially installed in
the centre of the inner sanctuary on Bhadon Sudi 1, 1661 B.K./August 16, 1604. Bhai Budha opened it with
reverence to obtain from it the divine command, as Guru Arjun stood in attendance behind. The following
hymn was read as God’s own pronouncement for the occasion :
He Himself hath succoured his saints in their work,
He Himself hath come to see their task fulfilled.
Blessed is the earth, blessed the tank,
Blessed is the tank with amrit filled.
Amrit overfloweth the tank : He hath had the task completed.
Eternal is the Perfect Being,
Vedas and Puranas sing His praise.
The Creator hath bestowed on me the nine treasures,
and all the supernatural powers,
No lack do I suffer now,
Enjoying His largesse, bliss have I attained,
Ever-expanding is the Lord’s bounty.
Guru Arjun directed that during daytime the Aad Granth should remain in the Harimandar and by
night, after the Sohi/a was read, it should be taken to the room he had built for himself in Guru-ka-Mahal. As
evening advanced by two watches, Bhai Budha recited Sobi/a and made the concluding Ardas or supplication.
The Granth Sahib was closed and wrapped in silks. Bhai Budha held it on his head and marched towards the
chamber indicated by Guru Arjun. The Guru led the sangat singing hymns. The Granth Sahib was placed on
the appointed seat, and the Guru slept on the ground by its side. Daily in the small hours of the morning as
the stars twinkle in the pool below, the Aad Granth is taken out in state to the Harimandar and brought by
night to rest — now, in a room at the Akal Takht. The practice continues to this day. But the volume is not
the same. That original copy was taken to Kartarpur, when Guru Arjun’s successor, Guru Hargobind, left
Amritsar in 1634. There it passed into the possession of his grandson, Dhir Mall. It has since remained in
that family.
In the Sikh system, the word Gwrv is used only for the ten prophet-preceptors — Guru Nanak to
Guru Gobind Singh, and for none other. Now this office of Guru is fulfilled by Guru Granth Sahib, the
Sacted Book, which was so apotheosized by the last Guru, Guru Gobind Singh, before he passed away in
1708. No living person, however holy or revered, can have the title or status of Guru. For Sikhs, Guru is the
holy teacher, the prophet under direct commission from God — the ten who have been and Guru Granth
Sahib which is their countinuing visible mainfestation.
Guru Gobind Singh created the Khalsa in 1699. In 1708, he supplied another permanent and final
feature in the evolution of the Sikh faith when he installed the Aad Granth as Guru. This is how the Bhat
Vahi Talauda Parganah Jind describes the event :
Guru Gobind Singh maball dasman beta Guru Tegh Bahadur ka pota Guru Hargobindji ka parpota Guru Anjunji
ka bans Guru Ram Dasji ki Surajbansi Gosal gotra Sodhi Khatri basi Anandpur parganah Kahlur muqam Nander tat
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Godavari des dakkhan sammat satran sai painsath Kartik mas ki chauth shukla pakkhe budbvar ke dibun Bhai Daya Singh
se bachan hoya Sri Granth Sabib lai ao. bachan pai Daya Singh Sri Granth Sahib lai aya. Guruji ne panch paise narial age
bheta rakha matha tea, sarbatt sangat se kaha mera hukam hai meri jagah Sri Granthyi ko janana jo Sikh janega tis ki ghal
thaen paegi Guru tis ki bahuri Rarega sat kar manana.
Guru Gobind Singh, the Tenth Master, son of Guru Tegh Bahadur, grandson of Guru Hargobind,
great-erandson of Guru Arjun, of the family of Guru Ram Das, Surajbansi Gosal clan, Sodhi Khatri, resident
of Anandpur, parganah Kahlur, now at Nanded, on the Godavari bank in the Deccan, asked Bhai Daya
Singh, on Wednesday, Shukla Chauth of the month of Katik, 1765 B.K. (October 6,1708) to fetch Sri Granth
Sahib. The Guru placed before it five pice and a coconut and bowed his head before it. He said to the sangat,
“Tt is my commandment : Own Sri Granthji in my place. He who so acknowledges it will obtain his reward.
The Guru will rescue him. Know this as the truth.”
According to Gaini Garja Singh to whom we owe the discovery of this entry, the author was Narbud
Singh Bhatt, who was with Guru Gobind Singh at Nanded at that time.
Bhatt Vahis are a new source of information discovered by Gaini Garja Singh (1904-77), a dogged
searcher for materials on Sikh history. The Bhatts were hereditary panegyrists, genealogists or family bards.
(A group of them were introduced to Guru Arjun by Bhatt Bhikkha who himself had become a disciple in the
time of Guru Amar Das. According to Bhai Gurdas, Var XI. 21, and Bhai Mani Singh, S7kkban di Bhagatmala,
he had earlier visited Guru Arjun with the sangat of Sultanpur Lodhi). Those of them who came into the
Sikh fold composed hymns in honour of the Gurus which were entered in Guru Granth Sahib by Guru
Arjun.
These Bhatts also recorded events of the lives of the Gurus and of the members of their families in
their scrolls called vabis. Some of these vahis are preserved to this day in the descendant families, especially at
the village of Karsindhu, in Jind district of Haryana. The script in which they are written is called bhatakshri
— a kind of family code like /ande and mahajani. The only known scholar to have worked with these
materials is Giani Garja Singh.
Apart from this new testimony culled by Giani Garja Singh from the Bhatt Vahis, another
contemporary document which authenticates the fact of Guru Granth Sahib having been invested with the
final authority is a letter issued by reference of Guru Gobind Singh’s wife, Mata Sundari. To quote from the
original, which is now in the possession of Bhai Chet Singh of the village of Bhai Rupa, in present day
Bhatinda district, to whose ancestors it was addressed :
Tkk Oankor Wahguru ji ki fateh. Sri ARalpurkji ka Khalsa yak rang jina ditha Wahguruji chit avai. Bhai Sahib
Dan Singhji Bhai Duni Singhji, Bhai Jagat Singhji Bhai Gurbakhsh Singhji, Ugar Singhji, Bhai Ram Singhji, sarbatt
Khalsa Wahguru Akal-purklyi ka pase likhtam gulam Khalsa ji ka Kahn Singh, Nival Singh, Mul Singhji, Sujan Singh,
Gaja Singh, Mahan Singh sarbatt Khalsa, Wahguru Akalpurkh ka Wahguru ji ki fateh vachani khusha karna ki Wahguru
Akalpurklyi har dam chit avai sukh hoe Khalse ji ka bol bala hoi ardas tusadi marfat Bhai Dulcha Singh ke hath pahutt
parbkai Khalsa ji bahut khuswaqat hoiya tusade bab Khalsaji dayal ho kai hath jore hai jo rakhya hove. “Jo jan harika
sevako hari tiske Rami,” Guru Granth japna Wahguru ang sang hai fajal Rarkai rakhia hovegi Khalsaji Bhai Kahn Singhji
kau Mata Sabibji ne gumastgiri Amristar ji ki mukarar Riti hai Khalsaji ne gurmata karke Harimandir ate bagh die
murammat imarat ka kam shuru kita hai, Sri Mata sabilji ne likha hai ki Wabguru Akalpurkh ji ke nagari mei langar
Jarur Rarna w.... Khalsa Sri Wahguru ji ka suchet bibek budh chahie jo sai Akalpurkh diye no janai nahi. Dasam
patshahian tak jamai paihne yarvin barvin Banda Chaubanda Ajita vagaire te aitkad lai avana hatiya hat. Hor hatiya Guru
Japan nal dur hosan, par ih hatyia gunah bakhshiaiga nabi jo manmukh ke jame upar aitkad Karenge. ‘Mukh (mobi) pheriai
mukh (mobi) jutha hot.’ Khalsa ji tusan sivai Akal duje no mannana nabi. Sabad dasvin patshahi tak khojna. “Shabad
khopi ihu gharu lahai Nanak taka dasu.” Guru ka nivas shabad vich hat.”Guru mahi ap samoi shabad vartaiya.” “Jian
andar jiu shabad hai jit sabu milava hoi.” Wahguru ji ki fateh. Bhai Mehar Singh tabla Bhai Bule ke pattar ko khasmane
vich rahina Guru nal gandb paisi.
[kk Oankar Wahiguru ji ki Fateh
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
The Khalsa, of the Timeless Himself, immersed in the One, and whose sight brings Wahiguru to
mind. Addressed to Bhai Sahib Dan Singhji, Bhai Duni Singhji, Bhai Jagat Singhji, Bhai Gurbaksh Singhji,
Ugar Singhji, Bhai Ram Singhji, the entire Khalsa of Wahiguru, the Timeless One. From the slaves of the
Khalsaji, Kahn Singhji, Nival Singhji, Mul Singhji, Sujan Singh, Gaja Singh, Maha Singh, Wahiguruji Ki Fateh
to the entire Khalsa. May you be rejoiced in constant remembrance of the Timeless Wahiguru. May
prosperity prevail; may supremacy belong to the Khalsa. Having received your missive through Bhai Dulcha
Singh, Khalsaji is highly pleased. Khalsaji happily prays with folded hands for your security. “He who to the
Lord surrenders himself, his affairs the Lord will set right.” Repeat always the name of the Guru. Wahiguru
is by your side. He will extend to you His grace and protection. Khalsaji, Mata Sahibji has appointed Bhai
Kahn Singhji to the superintendence of Amritsarji. The Khalsaji, through a gurmatta, has taken in hand the
construction and repair of the Harimandar and the garden. Sri Mata Sahibji has written that /angar must be
run in that place which is the abode of God Himself ...... Wahiguru’s Khalsa must always be alert, possessed
of discriminating wisdom. The Khalsa must believe in none other than the Timeless One. There have been
only Ten Masters in human form; to believe in the eleventh and twelfth, Banda (Banda Singh Bahadur), Ajita
(Ajit Singh, adopted son of Mata Sundariji), etc. is a mortal sin. Every other sin can be forgiven by repeating
the Guru’s name, but this sin of believing in human form will not be pardoned. “The faces turned away from
the Guru are faces perverted.” Khalsaji, you must believe in none other except the Timeless One. Go only
to the Ten Gurus in search of the Word. “Nanak is the slave of him who by seeking the Lord’s Name
obtains his goal.” The Guru resides in shabad. “The Lord hath merged His own Self in the Guru through
whom He hath revealed His Word.” “The Word is the life of all life, for, through it, one experiences God.”
Victory to the Lord. Bhai Mehar Singh, the messenger, son of Bhai Bula; keep the letter secure in your
custody. You will gain the Guru’s favour.
From this letter it is clear how the Sikhs after Guru Gobind Singh believed that the guruship had
passed to the shabad, i.e., the Word as contained in Guru Granth Sahib. None in the human form after the
ten Gurus was to be acknowledged by the Sikhs as Guru. Those who, like some of Banda Singh’s or Ajit
Singh’s followers, called their leaders gurus were committing a mortal sin. All their sins, says the letter, could
be forgiven by repeating the Guru’s name, but not the sin of believing in a living Guru after the Ten Masters
of the Sikh faith.
Several other old Sikh documents also attest the fact of succession having been passed on by Guru
Gobind Singh to Guru Granth Sahib. For instance, the Rahitnama by Bhai Nand Lal, one of Guru Gobind
Singh’s disciples remembered to this day for his Persian poetry in honour of the Gurus. In his Rahitnama, or
code of conduct, Bhai Nand Lal, who was at Nanded in the camp of Emperor Bahadur Shah as one of his
ministers at the time of Guru Gobind Singh’s passing away, thus records his last words in his Punjabi verse :
He who would wish to see the Guru,
Let him come and see the Granth.
He who would wish to speak with him,
Let him read and reflect upon what says the Granth.
He who would wish to hear his word,
He should with all his heart read the Granth,
ot listen to the Granth being read.
Another of Guru Gobind Singh’s disciples and associates, Bhai Prahlad Singh, records in his
Rabitnama the Guru’s commandment :
By the word of the Timeless One,
Has the Khalsa been manifested.
This is my commandment for all of my Sikhs :
Thou shalt acknowledge Granth as the Guru.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
In Gurbilas Patshahi 10 (author Koer Singh; the year of writing 1751), Guru Gobind Singh is quoted
as saying :
This is no more the age for a personal Guru to be anointed.
I shall not place the mark on anyone’s forehead
All sangat is owned as Khalsa now, under the shelter of the Almighty Himself,
They are now to the Word attached.
He who believes is the Sikh par excellence.
On Guru Granth should he put his reliance,
To none else should he direct his adoration.
All his wishes the Guru will bring to fulfilment
This he should believe,
Casting away all dubiety.
Another authority that may relevantly be quoted is Devaraja Sharma’s Nanaka candrodaya mahakavyam,
an old Sanskrit manuscript which has recently been published by Sanskrit University, Varanasi. It records
Guru Gobind Singh’s proclamation that the Scripture would be the Guru after him. “While the Master lay on
his deathbed, Nand Lal (?) came forward and asked the following question : ‘Who shall be our teacher now ?
Whom shall we salute and see, and what shall be the object of our discourses >?’ The Master replied, “The
Granth, which itself is the doctrine of the Guru, shall be your teacher. This is what you should see; this is
what you should honour; this is what should be the object of your discourses’.” The original, in Sanskrit,
reads as follows :
Nandalalas tadaprchat ko asmakam adhuna gurub kam namena ch pasyema Rasmai varta vadema ca uce gurutu
yusmakam grantha eva gururmatah tam nameta ca pasyeta tasmai varta vedeta ca.
Nanaka chndrodaya mahakavyam, XX1, 227-229
This point has been laboured somewhat lengthily for the reason that objections are sometimes raised.
Certain cults among Sikhs still owning personal gurus ask for authentic evidence to the effect that Guru
Gobind Singh had named Guru Granth Sahib his successor. No archival testimony can be presented, unless
the Bhatt Vahi entry be included in that category. But, evidence bequeathed through tradition, written as well
as oral, supports this fact. This is what has come down through Sikh memory. Had there been the 11th
Guru, the name could not have been effaced from the pages of history. Guru Gobind Singh brought to an
end the line of personal Gurus and declared the Holy Granth Guru after him.
Along with Guru Granth Sahib, the Khalsa was now the visible person of the Guru. The word
khalsa is derived from the Arabic &halis, meaning pure or pious. Guru Gobind Singh used the term in its
symbolic and technical sense. In official terminology, &ha/sa in Mughal days meant lands or territory directly
under the king. Crown-land was known as &halsa land. As says a contemporary poet, Bhai Gurdas I, Guru
Gobind Singh converted the sangat into the Khalsa. Sikhs were the Guru’s Khalsa, i.e., directly his own,
without any intermediary or local sangat leader. On that point, we have the evidence of S77 Gur Sobha by
Sainapat, a contemporary of Guru Gobind Singh, and Guru Gobind Singh’s own hukamnamas. To quote
from the former :
A day preceding the event (i.e. passing of Guru Gobind Singh),
The Sikhs gathered together,
And began to ask :
“What body will the Lord now take ?”
The Guru at that moment spoke :
“In the Khalsa wilt thou see me;
With the Khalsa is my sole concern :
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
My physical form have I bestowed upon the Khalsa.”
Guru Gobind Singh, in his hvkamnama issued on Phagun 4, 1765 B.K./February 1,1700, to the sangat
of Pattan Farid, modern Pakpattan, refers to the sangat as “his own Khalsa.” Hukamnamas are letters written
by the Gurus to sangats in different parts of the country. Some of them have been traced in recent years and
two collections were published in 1967 — one by Dr Ganda Singh (Punjabi University, Patiala) and the
second by Shamsher Singh Ashok (Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee, Amritsar). Most of the
hukamnamas are common to both anthologies. These bukamnamas are another valuable source of information
on the lives of the Gurus and on the Sikh communities living in far-flung places.
That Guru Granth Sahib is Guru Eternal has been the understanding and conviction of the Sikh
community since the passing away of Guru Gobind Singh. In their hard, exilic days soon afterwards, when
they were outlawed and had to seek the safety of the hills and jungles, the Sikhs’ most precious possesssion
which they cherished and defended at the cost of their lives was the Guru Granth Sahib. Guru Granth Sahib
was their sole religious reference, and they acknowledged none other. In the time of Maharaja Ranjit Singh,
who established sovereignty in the name of the Khalsa, personal piety and court ceremonial centred upon
Guru Granth Sahib. As contemporary records testify, Ranjit Singh began his day by making obeisance to
Guru Granth Sahib. On festive occasions, he made pilgrimage to Amritsar to bow before Guru Granth
Sahib in the Harimandar. For the Sikhs in general, Guru Granth Sahib was the only focus of religious
attachment. None other existed, either in human form or symbolically. In all Sikh literature after Guru
Gobind Singh, the Holy Book is uniformly referred to as Guru Granth.
The personal guruship was ended by Guru Gobind Singh himself. Succession passed to Guru
Granth Sahib in perpetuity. This was a most significant development in the history of the community. The
finality of the Holy Book was a fact rich in religious and social implications. Guru Granth Sahib became
Guru and received divine honours. It was acknowledged as the revelation descended through the Gurus. It
was for the Sikhs the perpetual authority, spiritual as well as historical. They lived their religion in response to
it. Through it, they were able to follow their faith more fully and more vividly. It was central to all that
subsequently happened in Sikh life. It was the source of their verbal tradition and it shaped their intellectual
and cultural environment. It moulded the Sikh concept of life. From it the community’s ideals, institutions
and rituals derived their meaning. Its role in guaranteeing the community’s integration and permanence, and
in determining the course of its history, has been crucial.
The Word enshrined in Guru Granth was always revered by the Gurus as well as by their disciples as
of Divine origin. The Guru was the revealer of the Word. One day the Word was to take the place of the
Guru. The line of personal Gurus could not have continued for ever. The inevitable came to pass when
Guru Gobind Singh declared Guru Granth Sahib to be his successor. It was only through the Word that the
Guruship could be made everlasting. This object Guru Gobind Singh intuitively secured when he
pronounced Guru Granth Sahib to be Guru after him. Guru Granth Sahib was henceforth — for all time —
the Guru of the Sikhs.
Since the day Guru Gobind Singh vested succession in it, Guru Granth Sahib has commanded the
same honour and reverence as would be due to the Guru himself. It is the focal point of Sikhs’ devotion.
The object of veneration in Sikh gwrdyaras is the Guru Granth Sahib. Gurdwara is in fact that place of
worship wherein the Guru Granth is seated. No images or idols are permitted inside a gurdwara. The Holy
Volume is opened ceremonially in the early hours of the morning after ardas or supplication. It must be
enthroned, draped in silk or other pieces of clean cloth, on a high seat on a pedestal under a canopy. The
congregation takes place in the presence of the Guru Granth Sahib, with the officiant, who could be anyone
from among those present, sitting in attendance, with a chavar or whisk in his hand which he keeps swinging
over it in veneration. The singing of hymns by a group of musicians will go on. All the time devotees keep
coming and bow low to the ground before Guru Granth Sahib to pay homage and take their seats on the
ground. The officiant or any other learned person, who will take his place behind Guru Granth Sahib, will
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
read out a hymn and expound it for the audience. At the end of the service, the audience will stand up in the
presence of Guru Granth Sahib with hands folded in front in reverence and one of them leading the Ardas or
prayer. At the end of the evening service Guru Granth Sahib will be closed, again after a short prayer, and
put to rest for the night. Guru Granth Sahib is similarly kept in some Sikh homes, where a separate room is
set apart for it. It is opened in the morning and put to rest in the evening in the same style and manner.
Before starting the day’s work, men and women will go into the room where Guru Granth Sahib has been
ceremonially installed, say a prayer in front of it and open the book at random and read the first hymn which
meets the eye to obtain what is called yak or the day’s lesson or order (bukam). Breviaries contain stipulated
banis from Guru Granth Sahib which constitute the daily offices and prayers of a Sikh.
An old custom which is coming more and mote into vogue is that of akhand path or uninterrupted
recital of Guru Granth Sahib from beginning to end. Such a recital must be completed within 48 hours. The
entire Guru Granth Sahib, 1430 large pages, is read through in a continuous ceremony. This reading must go
on day and night, without a moment’s intermission. The relay of reciters who take turns at reading the
Scripture must ensure that no break occurs. As they change places at given intervals, one picks the line from
his predecessor’s lips and continues. When and how the custom of reciting the canon in its entirety, in one
continuous service began, is not known. Conjecture traces it to the turbulent days of the 18th century when
persecutions scattered the Sikhs to far-off places. In those exilic, uncertain times, the practice of
accomplishing a reading of Guru Granth Sahib by continuous recital is believed to have originated.
Important days on the Sikh calendar are marked by akband paths in gurdwaras. Celebrations and
ceremonies in Sikh families centre around akhand paths. The homes are filled with holiness for those two days
and nights as the Guru Granth Sahib, installed with due ceremony in a room especially decorated for the
occasion, is being recited. Apart from lending the air of sanctity, such readings make available to listeners the
entire text. The listeners come as they wish and depart at their will. Thus they keep picking up snatches of
the bani from different portions at different times. Without such ceremonial recitals, Guru Granth Sahib, a
very large volume, would remain generally inaccessible to the laity except for banis which are recited by Sikhs
as part of their daily devotion. In bereavement, families derive comfort from these paths. Obsequies in fact
conclude with a completed reading of Guru Granth Sahib and prayers are offered in its presence at the end
for the departed soul.
There are variations on akhand path as well. A common one is the saptahik path wherein the recital of
the text is taken in parts and completed within one week. A sahj or slow-reading path may continue for a
longer time, even for months. At such paths Guru Granth Sahib is recited or intoned, not merely read. This
brings out tellingly the poetic quality of the bani and its power to move or grip the listener. But it must be
listened to in silence, sitting on the floor in front of it in a reverent posture.
The bani of Guru Granth Sahib is all in the spiritual key. It is poetry of pure devotion, lyrical and
moral. Guru Granth Sahib is the basis of Sikh practice as well as of Sikh devotion. It is the living source of
authority, the ultimate guide for the spiritual and moral path pointed out by the Gurus. Whatever is in
harmony with its tenor will be acceptable; whatever not, is rejected. Guidance is sought from it on doctrine,
or the tenets of the faith.
The Sikh Panth as a whole will resort to Guru Granth Sahib as will the individuals in moments of
perplexity or crisis. Instance comes to mind of the early days of the gurdwara movement aiming to reform
the ritual in Sikh places of worship. On October 12, 1920, a meeting of Sikh backward castes, sponsored by
the faculty and students of the Khalsa College at Amritsar, was held in the Jallianwala Bagh. The following
morning some of them were taken to the Golden Tample, but the granthis in control refused to accept
karabprashad ot sacrament they had brought as an offering and to say the Ardas on their behalf. There was an
outburst of protest against this discrimination towards the socalled low-caste Sikhs, totally contrary to the
Sikh teaching. A compromise was at last reached, and it was decided that the Guru’s direction be sought.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
The Guru Granth Sahib was, as is the custom, opened at random and the first verse on the page to be read
was :
He receives the lowly into grace,
And puts them in the path of righteous service.
The Guru’s verdict was clearly in favour of those whom the granthis had refused to accept as full
members of the community. This was a triumph for reformist Sikhs. The Rarabprasad brought was accepted
and distributed among the sangat.
Singly or in groups, in their homes or in congregations in their places of worship, Sikhs conclude
their morning and evening prayer, or prayer said at any other time as part of personal piety or of a ceremony,
with a supplication called Ardas. Ardas is followed by the recitation of these verses :
Agya bhaei_ Akal ki tabhi chalayo Panth,
Sabh sikkhan kau hukm hai Guru manio Granth.
Guru granth ji maniyo pragat Guran ki dehi
Jo Prabhu ko milibo chahai khoj shabad main lehi.
By the command of the Timeless Creator, was the Panth promulgated!
All Sikhs are hereby charged to own the Granth as their Guru.
Know the Guru Granth to be the person visible of the Gurus.
They who would seek to meet the Lord,
In the Word as manifested in the Granth shall they discover Him.
This is the status, the significance of Guru Granth Sahib in the Sikh way of life.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
22
THE GURUS LIVE THEIR IDEOLOGY’
DALJEET SINGH
By the very nature of our psyche we can take only a partial, relative and selective view of things and
events. That is a human frailty. There will, therefore, always be differences in the interpretation of various
hymns in Guru Granth Sahib and the system they lay down. But the best way to reduce and eliminate these
differences and to clarify the issues is to make a close study of the lives of the Gurus. Evidently their lives are
the best interpretation of their hymns. They are the true index to the kind of life they recommend.
Conversely, no study of their lives can be fruitful, and no conclusions about them valid, unless seen in the
light of their hymns. The tight interpretation of the system embodied in Guru Granth Sahib is the one
illustrated and exemplified by the lives of the Gurus themselves, since their words and deeds match each
other.
From the hymns in Guru Granth Sahib we have drawn some conclusions on various issues, like,
their world-view, the reality of the physical world, the goal of man, the ideal life, the role and ethics of the
mystic, especially concerning social and political problems, freedom and necessity. The lives of the Gurus
will clarify and testify whether the inferences drawn by us about their ideology are cogent and correct. That is
why we are separately studying their lives in order to understand and interpret their views on different
aspects of their religion.
We do not propose to write a detailed account of the lives of the Gurus, nor shall we try to evaluate
their contribution to history. That is beyond the scope of our study. Our object is to state only those
activities which elucidate and illustrate the Sikh ideology. Secondly, we shall, for obvious reasons, accept
facts, views and sources that are authentic. Evidently, contemporary and near contemporary views have a
weight of their own. In addition, they furnish a reliable evidence of the image the Gurus left about their
views on the contemporary society and on those who came into contact with them.
GURU NANAK (1469-1539)*
Guru Nanak was born in 1469 in Talwandi, a village in the Sheikhupura district, 65 kms. west of
Lahore. His father was a village official in the local revenue administration. As a boy, Guru Nanak learnt,
besides the regional languages, Persian and Arabic. He was married in 1487 and was blessed with two sons,
one in 1491 and the second in 1496. In 1485 he took up, at the instance of his brother-in-law, the
appointment of an official in charge of the stores of Daulat Khan Lodhi, the Muslim ruler of the area at
Sultanpur. It is there that he came into contact with Mardana, a low caste (Miras?) Muslim minstrel who was
ten years senior in age.
By all accounts, 1496 was the year of his enlightenment when he started on his mission. His first
statement after his prophetic communion with God was “There is no Hindu, nor any Mussalman.” This is an
announcement of supreme significance. It declared not only the brotherhood of man and the fatherhood of
God, but also his clear and primary interest not in any metaphysical doctrine but only in man and his fate. It
means love your neighbour as yourself. In addition, it emphasised, simultaneously, the inalienable spirituo-
moral combination of his message. Accompanied by Mardana, he began his missionary tours. Apart from
conveying his message and rendering help to the weak, he forcefully preached, both by precept and practice,
against caste distinctions, ritualism, idol worship and the pseudo-teligious beliefs that had no spiritual content.
He chose to mix with all. He dined and lived with men of the lowest castes and classes. Considering the then
prevailing cultural practices and traditions, this was something socially and religiously unheard of in those
days of rigid Hindu caste system sanctioned by the scriptures and the religiously approved notions of
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
untouchability and pollution. It is a matter of great significance that at the very beginning of his mission, the
Guru’s first companion was a low caste Muslim. The offerings he received during his tours, were distributed
among the poor. Any surplus collected was given to his hosts to maintain a common kitchen, where all could
sit and eat together without any distinction of caste and status. This institution of common kitchen or /angar
became a major instrument of helping the poor, and a nucleus for religious gatherings of his society and of
establishing the basic equality of all castes, classes and sexes.
Despite the hazards of travel in those times, he performed five long tours all over the country and
even outside it. He visited most of the known religious places and centres of worship. At one time he
preferred to dine at the place of a low caste artisan, Bhai Lallo, instead of accepting the invitation of a high
caste rich landlord, Malik Bhago, because the latter lived by exploitation of the poor and the former earned
his bread by the sweat of his brow. This incident has been depicted by a symbolic representation of the
reason for his preference. Guru Nanak pressed in one hand the coarse loaf of bread from Lallo’s hut and in
the other the food from Bhago’s house. Milk gushed forth from the loaf of Lallo’s and blood from the
delicacies of Bhago. This prescription for honest work and living and the condemnation of exploitation,
coupled with the Guru’s dictum that “riches cannot be gathered without sin and evil means,” have, from the
very beginning, continued to be the basic moral tenet with the Sikh mystics and the Sikh society.
During his tours, he visited numerous places of Hindu and Muslim worship. He explained and
exposed through his preachings the incongruities and fruitlessness of ritualistic and ascetic practices. At
Hardwar, when he found people throwing Ganges water towards the sun in the east as oblations to their
ancestors in heaven, he started, as a measure of correction, throwing the water towards the West, in the
direction of his fields in the Punjab. When ridiculed about his folly, he replied, “If Ganges water will reach
your ancestors in heaven, why should the water I throw up not reach my fields in the Punjab, which are far
less distant ?”
He spent twentyfive years of his life preaching from place to place. Many of his hymns were
composed during this period. They represent answers to the major religious and social problems of the day
and cogent responses to the situations and incidents that he came across. Some of the hymns convey
dialogues with Yogis in the Punjab and elsewhere. He denounced their methods of living and their religious
views. During these tours he studied other religious systems like Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism and Islam.
At the same time, he preached the doctrines of his new religion and mission at the places and centres he
visited.
Since his mystic system almost completely reversed the trends, principles and practices of the then
prevailing religions, he criticised and rejected virtually all the old beliefs, rituals and harmful practices existing
in the country. This explains the necessity of his long and arduous tours and the variety and profusion of his
hymns on all the religious, social, political and theological issues, practices and institutions of his period.
Finally, on the completion of his tours, he settled as a peasant farmer at Kartarpur, a village in the
Punjab. Bhai Gurdas, the scribe of Guru Granth Sahib, was a devout and close associate of the third and the
three subsequent Gurus. He was born 12 years after Guru Nanak’s death and joined the Sikh mission in his
very boyhood. He became the chief missionary agent of the Gurus. Because of his intimate knowledge of
the Sikh society and his being a near contemporary of Guru Nanak, his writings are historically authentic and
reliable. He writes that at Kartarpur Guru Nanak donned the robes of a peasant and continued his ministry.
He organised Sikh societies at places he visited with their meeting places called Dharamsalas. A similar society
was created at Kartarpur. In the morning, Japjz was sung in the congregation. In the evening Sodar and Arti
were recited. The Guru cultivated his lands and also continued with his mission and preachings. His
followers throughout the country were known as Nanak-panthies or Sikhs. The places where Sikh
congregation and religious gatherings of his followers were held were called Dharamsalas. These were also the
places for feeding the poor. Eventually, every Sikh home became a Dharamsala.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
One thing is very evident. Guru Nanak had a distinct sense of his prophethood and that his mission
was God-ordained. During his preachings, he himself announced. “O Lallo, as the words of the Lord come
to me, so do I express them.” Successors of Guru Nanak have also made similar statements indicating that
they were the messengers of God. So often Guru Nanak refers to God as his Enlightener and Teacher. His
statements clearly show his belief that God had commanded him to preach an entirely new religion, the
central idea of which was the brotherhood of man and the fatherhood of God, shorn of all ritualism and
priestcraft. During a dialogue with the Yogis, he stated that his mission was to help everyone. He came to be
called a Guru in his lifetime. In Punjabi, the word Guru means both God and an enlightener or a prophet.
During his life, his disciples were formed and came to be recognised as a sepatate community. He was
accepted as a new religious prophet. His followers adopted a separate way of greeting each other with the
words Sat Kartar (God is true). Twentyfive years of his extensive preparatory tours and preachings across the
length and breadth of the country clearly show his deep conviction that the people needed a new prophetic
message which God had commanded him to deliver. He chose his successor and in his own life time
established him as the future Guru or enlightener of the new community. This step is of the greatest
significance, showing Guru Nanak’s determination and declaration that the mission which he had started and
the community he had created were distinct and should be continued, promoted and developed. By the
formal ceremony of appointing his successor and by giving him a new name, Angad (his part or limb), he laid
down the clear principle of impersonality, unity and indivisibility of Guruship. At that time he addressed
Angad by saying, “Between thou and me there is now no difference.” In Guru Granth Sahib there is clear
acceptance and proclamation of this identity of personality in the hymns of Satfa-Bahvand. This unity of
spititual personality of all the Gurus has a theological and mystic implication. It is also endorsed by the fact
that each of the subsequent Gurus calls himself Nanak in his hymns. Never do they call themselves by their
own names as was done by other Bhagats and mystics. That Guru Nanak attached the highest importance to
his mission is also evident from his selection of the successor by a system of test, and only when he was
found perfect,” was Guru Angad appointed as his successor. He was comparatively a new comer to the fold,
and yet he was chosen in preference to the Guru’s own son, Sri Chand, who also had the reputation of being
a pious person, and Baba Budha, a devout Sikh of long standing, who during his own lifetime had the
distinction of ceremonially installing all subsequent Gurus.
All these facts indicate that Guru Nanak had a clear plan and vision that his mission was to be
continued as an independent and distinct spiritual system on the lines laid down by him, and that, in the
context of the country, there was a clear need for the organisation of such a spiritual mission and society. In
his own lifetime, he distinctly determined its direction and laid the foundations of some of the new religious
institutions. In addition, he created the basis for the extension and organisation of his community and
religion.
The above in brief is the story of the Guru’s life. We shall now note the chief features of his work,
how they arose from his message and how he proceeded to develop them during his lifetime.
(1) After his enlightenment, the first words of Guru Nanak declared the brotherhood of man. This
principle formed the foundation of his new spiritual gospel. It involved a fundamental doctrinal change
because moral life received the sole spiritual recognition and status. This was something entirely opposed to
the religious systems in vogue in the country during the time of the Guru. All those systems were, by and
large, other-worldly. As against it, the Guru by his new message brought God on earth. For the first time in
the country, he made a declaration that God was deeply involved and interested in the affairs of man and the
world which was real and worth living in. Having taken the first step by the proclamation of his radical
message, his obvious concern was to adopt further measures to implement the same.
(2) The Guru realised that in the context and climate of the country, especially because of the then
existing religious systems and the prevailing prejudices, there would be resistance to his message, which, in
view of his very thesis, he wanted to convey to all. He, therefore, refused to remain at Sultanpur and preach
his gospel from there. Having declared the sanctity of life, his second major step was in the planning and
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
organisation of institutions that would spread his message. As such, his twentyfive years of extensive touring
can be understood only as a major organisational step. These tours were not casual. They had a triple object.
He wanted to acquaint himself with all the centres and organisations of the prevalent religious systems so as
to assess the forces his mission had to contend with, and to find out the institutions that he could use in the
aid of his own system. Secondly, he wanted to convey his gospel at the very centres of the old systems and
point out the futile and harmful nature of their methods and practices. It is for this purpose that he visited
Hardwar, Kurukshetra, Banaras, Kanshi, Gaya, Ceylon, Baghdad, Mecca, etc. Simultaneously, he desired to
organise all his followers and set up for them local centres for their gatherings and worship. The existence of
some of these far-flung centres even up-till today is a testimony to his initiative in the organisational and the
societal field. His hymns became the sole guide and the scripture for his flock and were sung at the
Dharamsalas.
(3) Guru Nanak’s gospel was for all men. He proclaimed their equality in all respects. In his
system, the householder’s life became the primary forum of religious activity. Human life was not a burden
but a privilege. His was not a concession to the laity. In fact, the normal life became the medium of spiritual
training and expression. The entire discipline and institutions of the Gurus can be appreciated only if one
understands that, by the very logic of Guru Nanak’s system, the householder’s life became essential for the
seeker. On reaching Kartarpur after his tours, the Guru sent for the members of his family and lived there
with them for the remaining eighteen years of his life. For the same reason his followers all over the country
were not recluses. They were ordinary men, living at their own homes and pursuing their normal vocations.
The Guru’s system involved morning and evening prayers. Congregational gatherings of the local followers
were also held at their respective Dharamsalas.
(4) After he returned to Kartarpur, Guru Nanak did not rest. He straightaway took up work as a
cultivator of land, without interrupting his discourses and morning and evening prayers. It is very significant
that throughout the later eighteen years of his mission he continued to work as a peasant. It was a total
involvement in the moral and productive life of the community. His life was a model for others to follow.
Like him all his disciples were regular workers who had not given up their normal vocations. Even while he
was performing the important duties of organising a new religion, he never shirked the full-time duties of a
small cultivator. By his personal example he showed that the leading of a normal man’s working life was
fundamental to his spiritual system. Even a seemingly small departure from this basic tenet would have been
misunderstood and misconstrued both by his own followers and others. In the Guru’s system, idleness
became a vice and engagement in productive and constructive work a virtue. It was Guru Nanak who
chastised ascetics as idlers and condemned their practice of begging for food at the doors of the
householders.
(5) Another important aspect of the moral life which the Guru emphasised was the sharing of one’s
income. He said, “property could be gathered only by vice.” It obviously meant that while doing productive
work and earning one’s livelihood were moral, the amassing of wealth was evil. In this context, he introduced
the new practice of sharing one’s income. We have already quoted his dictum that “he knows the way who
works hard and shares his earnings with others.” He insisted that his disciples should share their income with
others and divert it for common purposes. Every Sikh home, as enjoined by him, became a centre for
helping the weak and the poor. Here, too, the Guru gave a personal lead. During his tours, whatever he
received was given to feed the poor and finance the common kitchen. Similarly, at Kartarpur he created the
institution of a free common kitchen (/angar) and started the practice of everyone eating at one place (panga?).
(6) According to the Guru, moral life was the sole medium of spiritual progress. In those times,
caste, religious and social distinctions, and the idea of pollution were major problems. Unfortunately, these
distinctions had received religious sanction. The problem of poverty and food was another moral challenge.
The institution of /angar had a twin purpose. As every one sat and ate at the same place and shared the same
food, it cut at the root of the evil of caste, class and religious distinctions. Besides, it demolished the idea of
pollution of food by the mere presence of an untouchable. Secondly, it provided food to the needy. This
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
institution of /angar and pangat was started by the Guru among all his followers wherever they had been
organised. It became an integral part of the moral life of the Sikhs. Considering that a large number of his
followers were of low caste and poor members of society, he, from the very start, made it clear that persons
who wanted to maintain caste and class distinctions had no place in his system. In fact, the twin duties of
sharing one’s income with the poor and doing away with social distinctions were the two obligations which
every Sikh had to discharge. On this score, he left no option to anyone, since he started his mission with
Mardana, a low caste Muslim, as his life long companion.
(7) The greatest departure Guru Nanak made was to prescribe for the religious man the
responsibility of confronting evil and oppression. It was he who said that God destroys ‘the evil doers’ and
‘the demonical’; and that such being God’s nature and will, it is man’s goal to carry out that will. Since there
are evil doers in life, it is the spiritual duty of the seeker and his society to resist evil and injustice. Again, it is
Guru Nanak who protests and complains that Babur had been committing tyranny against the weak and the
innocent. Having laid the principle and the docttine, it was again he who proceeded to organise a society.
Because political and societal oppression cannot be resisted by individuals, the same can be confronted only
by a committed society. It was, therefore, he who proceeded to create a society and appointed a successor
with the clear instructions to develop his Panth. Again, it was Guru Nanak who emphasised that life is a game
of love, and once on that path one should not shirk laying down one’s life. Love of one’s brother or
neighbour also implies, if love is true, his or her protection from attack, injustice and tyranny. Hence, the
necessity of creating a religious society that can discharge this spiritual obligation. This is the rationale of
Guru Nanak’s system and the development of the Sikh society which he organised.
(8) The Guru expressed all his teachings in Punjabi, the spoken language of Northern India. It was a
clear indication of his desire not to address the elite alone but the masses as well. It is recorded that the Sikhs
had no regard for Sanskrit, which was the sole scriptural language of the Hindus. Both these facts lead to
important inferences. They reiterate that the Guru’s message was for all. It was not for the few who, because
of their personal aptitude, should feel drawn to a life of a so-called spiritual meditation and contemplation.
Nor was it an exclusive spiritual system divorced from the normal life. In addition, it stressed that the Guru’s
message was entirely new and was completely embodied in his hymns. His disciples used his hymns as their
sole guide for all their moral, religious and spiritual purposes. Thirdly, the disregard of the Sikhs for Sanskrit
strongly suggests that not only was the Guru’s message independent and self-contained, without reference
and resort to the Sanskrit scriptures and literature, but also that the Guru made a deliberate attempt to cut off
his disciples completely from all the traditional sources and the priestly class. Otherwise, the old concepts,
ritualistic practices, modes of worship and orthodox religions were bound to affect adversely the growth of
his religion which had wholly a different basis and direction and demanded an entirely new approach.
The following hymn from Guru Nanak and the subsequent one from Sankara are contrast in their
approach to the world.
“The sun and moon, O Lord, are Thy lamps; the firmament Thy salver; the orbs of the stars the
pearls encased in it.
The perfume of the sandal is Thine incense, the wind is Thy fan, all the forests are Thy flowers, O
Lord of light.
What worship is this, O Thou Destroyer of birth ? Unbeaten strains of ecstasy are the trumpets
of Thy worship.
Thou has a thousand eyes and yet not one eye; Thou hast a thousand forms and yet not one form;
Thou hast a thousand stainless feet and yet not one foot; Thou hast a thousand organs of smell
and yet not one organ. I am fascinated by this play of Thine.
The light which is in everything is Thine, O Lord of light.
From its brilliancy everything is illuminated;
By the Guru’s teaching the light becometh manifest.
What pleaseth Thee is the real worship.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
O God, my mind is fascinated with Thy lotus feet as the bumble-bee with the flower; night and day
I thirst for them.
Give the water of Thy favour to the Sarang (bird) Nanak, so that he may dwell in Thy Name.’?
Sankara writes : “I am not a combination of the five perishable elements. I am neither body, the
senses, nor what is in the body (anfar-anga : i.e., the mind). I am not the ego-function : I am not the group of
the vital breathforces; I am not intuitive intelligence (buddbi). Far from wife and son am J, far from land and
wealth and other notions of that kind. I am the Witness, the Eternal, the Inner Self, the Blissful One (sivo-
ham; suggesting also, ‘I am Siva’).”
“Owing to ignorance of the rope the rope appears to be a snake; owing to ignorance of the Self the
transient state arises of the individualized, limited, phenomenal aspect of the Self. The rope becomes a rope
when the false impression disappears because of the statement of some credible person; because of the
statement of my teacher I am not an individual life-monad (/ivo-naham), | am the Blissful One (sio-ham ).”
“T am not the born; how can there be either birth or death for me ?”
“T am not the vital air; how can there be either hunger or thirst for me ?”
“T am not the mind, the organ of thought and feeling; how can there be either sorrow or delusion
for me >?”
“T am not the doer; how can there be either bondage or release for me ?”
“T am neither male nor female, nor am I sexless. I am the Peaceful One, whose form is self-
effulgent, powerful radiance. I am neither a child, a young man, nor an ancient; nor am I of any caste. I do
not belong to one of the four life-stages. I am the Blessed-Peaceful One, who is the only Cause of the origin
and dissolution of the world.’
While Guru Nanak is bewitched by the beauty of His creation and sees in the panorama of nature a
lovely scene of the worshipful adoration of the Lord, Sankara in his hymn rejects the reality of the world and
treats himself as the Sole Reality. Zimmer feels that “Such holy megalomania goes past the bounds of sense.
With Sankara, the grandeur of the supreme human experience becomes intellectualised and reveals its
inhuman sterility.’
No wonder that Guru Nanak found the traditional religions and concepts as of no use for his
purpose. He calculatedly tried to wean away his people from them. For Guru Nanak, religion did not consist
in a “patched coat or besmearing oneself with ashes”® but in treating all as equals. For him the service of
man is supreme and that alone wins a place in God’s heart.
By this time it should be easy to discern that all the eight features of the Guru’s system are integrally
connected. In fact, one flows from the other and all follow from the basic tenet of his spiritual system, viz.,
the fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man. For Guru Nanak, life and human beings became the
sole field of his work. Thus arose the spiritual necessity of a normal life and work and the identity of moral
and spiritual functioning and growth.
Having accepted the primacy of moral life and its spiritual validity, the Guru proceeded to identify
the chief moral problems of his time. These were caste and class distinctions, the institutions, of property
and wealth, and poverty and scarcity of food. Immoral institutions could be substituted and replaced only by
the setting up of rival institutions. Guru Nanak believed that while it is essential to elevate man internally, it
is equally necessary to uplift the fallen and the downtrodden in actual life. Because, the ultimate test of one’s
spiritual progress is the kind of moral life one leads in the social field. The Guru not only accepted the
necessity of affecting change in the environment, but also endeavoured to build new institutions. We shall
find that these eight basic principles of the spirituo-moral life enunciated by Guru Nanak, were strictly carried
out by his successors. As envisaged by the first prophet, his successors further extended the structure and
organised the institutions of which the foundations had been laid by Guru Nanak. Though we shall consider
these points while dealing with the lives of the other nine Gurus, some of them need to be mentioned here.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
The primacy of the householder’s life was maintained. Everyone of the Gurus, excepting Guru
Harkishan who died at an early age, was a married person who maintained a family. When Guru Nanak, sent
Guru Angad from Kartarpur to Khadur Sahib to start his mission there, he advised him to send for the
members of his family and live a normal life. According to Bhalla,’ when Guru Nanak went to visit Guru
Angad at Khadur Sahib, he found him living a life of withdrawal and meditation. Guru Nanak directed him
to be active as he had to fulfill his mission and organise a community inspired by his religious principles.
Work in life, both for earning the livelihood and serving the common good, continued to be the
fundamental tenet of Sikhism. There is a clear record that everyone upto the Fifth Guru (and probably
subsequent Gurus too) earned his livelihood by a separate vocation and contributed his surplus to the
institution of /angar. Each Sikh was made to accept his social responsibility. So much so that Guru Angad
and finally Guru Amar Das clearly ordered that Udasis, persons living a celibate and ascetic life without any
productive vocation, should remain excluded from the Sikh fold. As against it, any worker or a householder
without distinction of class or caste could become a Sikh. This indicates how these two principles were
deemed fundamental to the mystic system of Guru Nanak. It was defined and laid down that in Sikhism a
normal productive and moral life could alone be the basis of spiritual progress. Here, by the very rationale of
the mystic path, no one who was not following a normal life could be fruitfully included.
The organisation of moral life and institutions, of which the foundations had been laid by Guru
Nanak, came to be the chief concern of the other Gurus. We refer to the socio-political martyrdoms of two
of the Gurus and the organisation of the military struggle by the Sixth Guru and his successors. Here it
would be pertinent to mention Bhai Gurdas’s narration of Guru Nanak’s encounter and dialogue with the
Nath Yogis who were living an ascetic life of retreat in the remote hills. They asked Guru Nanak how the
world below in the plains was faring. “How could it be well”, replied Guru Nanak, “when the so-called pious
men had resorted to the seclusion of the hills ?” The Naths commented that it was incongruous and self-
contradictory for Guru Nanak to be a householder and also pretend to lead a spiritual life. That, they said,
was like putting acid in milk and thereby destroying its purity. The Guru replied emphatically that the Naths
were ignorant of even the basic elements of spiritual life.? This authentic record of the dialouge reveals the
then prevailing religious thought in the country. It points to the clear and deliberate break the Guru made
from the traditional system.
While Guru Nanak was catholic in his criticism of other religions, he was unsparing where he felt it
necessary to clarify an issue or to keep his flock away from a wrong practice or prejudice. He categorically
attacked all the evil institutions of his time including oppression and barbarity in the political field, corruption
among the officials and hypocrisy and greed in the priestly class. He deprecated the degrading practices of
inequality in the social field. He criticised and repudiated the scriptures that sanctioned such practices. After
having denounced all of them, he took tangible steps to create a society that accepted the religious
responsibility of eliminating these evils from the new institutions created by him and of attacking the evil
practices and institutions in the social and political fields. This was a fundamental institutional change with
the largest dimensions and implications for the future of the community and the country. The very fact that
originally poorer classes were attracted to the Gurus, fold shows that they found there a society and a place
where they could breathe freely and live with a sense of equality and dignity.
Dr H.R. Gupta, the well-known historian, writes, “Nanak’s religion consisted in the love of God,
love of man and love of godly living. His religion was above the limits of caste, creed and country. He gave
his love to all, Hindus, Muslims, Indians and foreigners alike. His religion was a people’s movement based on
modern conceptions of secularism and socialism, a common brotherhood of all human beings. Like
Rousseau, Nanak felt 250 years earlier that it was the common people who made up the human race. They
had always toiled and tussled for princes, priests and politicians. What did not concern the common people
was hardly worth considering. Nanak’s work to begin with assumed the form of an agrarian movement. His
teachings were purely in Punjabi language mostly spoken by cultivators. They appealed to the downtrodden
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
and the oppressed peasants and petty traders as they were ground down between the two mill stones of
Government tyranny and the new Muslims’ brutality. Nanak’s faith was simple and sublime. It was the life
lived. His religion was not a system of philosophy like Hinduism. It was a discipline, a way of life, a force,
which connected one Sikh with another as well as with the Guru.”!® “In Nanak’s time Indian society was
based on caste and was divided into countless watertight compartments. Men were considered high and low
on account of their birth and not according to their deeds. Equality of human beings was a dream. There
was no spirit of national unity except feelings of community fellowship. In Nanak’s views men’s love of God
was the criterion to judge whether a person was good or bad, high or low. As the caste system was not based
on divine love, he condemned it. Nanak aimed at creating a casteless and classless society similar to the
modern type of socialist society in which all were equal and where one member did not exploit the other.
Nanak insisted that every Sikh house should serve as a place of love and devotion, a true guest house (Sach
dharamshala). Every Sikh was enjoined to welcome a traveller or a needy person and to share his meals and
other comforts with him.”!! “Guru Nanak aimed at uplifting the individual as well as building a nation.” !
Considering the religious conditions and the philosophies of the time and the social and political
milien in which Guru Nanak was born, the new spirituo-moral thesis he introduced and the changes he
brought about in the social and spiritual field were indeed radical and revolutionary. Earlier, release from the
bondage of the world was sought as the goal. The householder’s life was considered an impediment and an
entanglement to be avoided by seclusion, monasticism, celibacy, sanyasa or vanprastha. In contrast, in the
Guru’s system the world became the arena of spiritual endeavour. A normal life and moral and righteous
deeds became the fundamental means of spiritual progress, since these alone were approved by God. Man
was free to choose between the good and the bad and shape his own future by choosing virtue and fighting
evil. All this gave “new hope, new faith, new life and new expectations to the depressed, dejected and
downcast people of Punjab.”
Guru Nanak’s religious concepts and system were entirely opposed to those of the traditional
religions in the country. His views were different even from those of the saints of the Radical Bhakti
movement. From the very beginning of his mission, he started implementing his doctrines and creating
institutions for their practice and development. In his time the religious energy and zeal were flowing away
from the empirical world into the desert of otherworldliness, asceticism and renunciation. It was Guru
Nanak’s mission and achievement not only to dam that Amazon of moral and spiritual energy but also to
divert it into the world so as to enrich the moral, social the political life of man. We wonder if, in the context
of his times, anything could be more astounding and miraculous. The task was undertaken with a faith,
confidence and determination which could only be prophetic.
It is indeed the emphatic manifestation of his spiritual system into the moral formations and
institutions that created a casteless society of people who mixed freely, worked and earned righteously,
contributed some of their income to the common causes and the /augar. It was this community, with all kinds
of its shackles broken and a new freedom gained, that bound its members with a new sense of cohesion,
enabling it to rise triumphant even though subjected to the severest of political and military persecutions.
The life of Guru Nanak shows that the only interpretation of his thesis and doctrines could be the
one which we have accepted. He expressed his doctrines through the medium of activities. He himself laid
the firm foundations of institutions and trends which flowered and fructified later on. As we do not find a
trace of those ideas and institutions in the religious milieu of his time or the religious history of the country,
the entirely original and new character of his spiritual system could have only been mystically and
prophetically inspired.
Apart from the continuation, consolidation and expansion of Guru Nanak’s mission, the account
that follows seeks to present the major contributions made by the remaining Gurus.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
NANAK II (1539-1552)
Guru Angad invented the present form of the Gurmukhi script. It became the medium of writing
the Punjabi language in which the hymns of the Gurus are expressed. This step had a far-reaching purpose
and impact. First, it gave the people who spoke this language an identity of their own, enabling them to
express their thought directly and without any difficulty or transliteration. The measure had the effect of
establishing the independence of the mission and the followers of the Guru. Secondly, it helped the
community to dissociate itself from the Sanskrit religous tradition so that the growth and development of the
Sikhs could take place unhampered and unprejudiced by the backlog of the earlier religious and social
philosophies and practices. This measure, as shown by the subsequent growth of Sikhism, was essential in
order to secure its unhindered development and progtess as it required an entirely different approach to life.
Dr Gupta feels that this step, to a certain extent, kept the upper classes among Hindus, to which the
Guru belonged, away from Sikhism, partly because they were steeped in the old religious and Brahminical
tradition and partly because the Sanskrit tradition fed their ego by giving them a superior caste status to that
of the other castes. But, the idea of equality of man was fundamental to the Sikh spiritual system. The Guru
knew that its association with traditional religious literature would tend to water it down. The matter is
extremely important from the point of view of the historical growth and study. Actually, the students of Sikh
history know that over the centuries the influence of these old traditions has been very much in evidence. It
has sometimes even given a wrong twist to the new thesis and its growth. The educated persons were almost
entirely drawn from the upper castes and classes. They had a vested interest, visible also in their writings, in
introducing ideas and practices which helped in maintaining their privileges and prejudices of caste
superiority, even though such customs were opposed to the fundamentals about the equality of man laid
down by the Gurus. For example, the Jats, who were themselves drawn from classes branded as low by the
Brahminical system, started exhibiting caste prejudices v7s-a-vis the lower castes drawn from the Hindu fold.
Earlier, the Punjabi language was written in the Landa or Mahajani script. This had no vowel sounds,
which had to be imagined or construed by the reader in order to decipher the writing. Therefore, there was
the need of a script which could faithfully reproduce the hymns of the Gurus so that the true meaning and
message of the Gurus could not be misconstrued and misinterpreted by each reader to suit his own purpose
and prejudices. The devising of the Gurmukhi script was an essential step in order to maintain the purity of
the doctrine and exclude all possibility of misunderstanding and misconstruction by interested persons.
The institution of /amgar was maintained and developed. The Guru’s wife personally worked in the
kitchen. She also served food to the members of the community and the visitors. Her devotion to this
institution finds mention in Guru Granth Sahib.’4
The Guru earned his own living by twisting coarse grass into strings used for cots. All offerings went
to the common fund. This demonstrates that it is necessary and honourable to do even the meanest
productive work. It also emphasises that parasitical living is not in consonance with the mystic and moral
path. In line with Guru Nanak’s teaching, the Guru also declared that there was no place for passive recluses
in the community.
ike Guru Nanak, Guru Angad and the subsequent Gurus selected and appointed their successors by
completely satisfying themselves about their mystic fitness and capacity to discharge the responsibilities of the
mission.
NANAK III (1552-1574)
Guru Amar Das, though born in 1479, became the Guru in 1552 when he was in his seventies. All
the same he took many significant steps. He established new centres for conveying to the people the message
of Guru Nanak. Twentytwo such centres were created in different areas where persons, approved by the
Guru, performed extension work. They administered both to the religious and the temporal needs of the
disciples; for, in the Guru’s system legitimate temporal needs were included in the religious needs. They
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
collected offerings from the disciples and sent them to the Guru for the common use of the community. The
Guru himself earned his living as a small tradesman.
He started the system of holding two annual gatherings of his disciples from all over the country. At
his headquarters, he undertook the construction of a dao# (a well with a perennial source of spring water).
Por the Sikhs the headquarters of the Guru and this bao/ became a holy place of pilgrimage.
Guru Angad had collected the hymns of Guru Nanak. To these Guru Amar Das added the hymns
of the former as well as his own.
As an anti-caste and anti-pollution measure, he made it incumbent that no one, irrespective of his
status or caste, could see him unless he had first partaken, along with others, of the food cooked at the
common kitchen. Emperor Akbar had also to dine at the /angar before he met the Guru.
In his time, ascetics and recluses again made an attempt to enter the Guru’s flock. But the Guru
issued a final injunction that no recluse or ascetic could be a Sikh. He also denounced the system of saf# and
of purdah among women.
According to the Guru, the human body was the temple of God. He, therefore, laid emphasis on
keeping it healthy and sound to the end. For the same reason, he denounced the ascetic practices of torturing
the body. The Guru felt that the health of the body could not be divorced from moral and spiritual well-
being.
NANAK IV (1574-1581)
Guru Ram Das was Guru for a short period. After obtaining land for the purpose, he founded the
town of Amritsar which continues to be the centre of Sikhism till today. He dug a tank which became the
principal place of pilgrimage. Traders and artisans were invited to settle at the town so that its growth could
be rapid. In due course it became the largest commercial centre in northern India. It was a landmark in the
life of the community, because the Guru established a central place that was quite distinct from that of the
Hindus and the Muslims. Since then Amritsar is for the Sikhs what Mecca is for the Muslims. All this
indicates that the Guru had a distinct sense of his mission and did everything to establish it as a separate
religious system and entity.
NANAK V (1581-1606)
Guru Arjun’s multifarious activities, apart from making a very major contribution to the organisation
of the mission, demonstrate, as laid down by Guru Nanak, that no field of life, whether temporal, social or
political, is excluded for the operation of a mystic. Slowly but surely the movement came out with a distinct
identity of its own and with clear-cut religious and socio-political facets.
The system of voluntary offerings for the common cause and the sharing of one’s earnings was made
regular. Every Sikh was supposed to contribute 10% of his income to the common fund maintained by the
Guru. The representatives of the Guru collected contributions from their respective areas and sent them to
the common treasury.
The construction of the temple at Amritsar was started by the Guru and its foundation stone was laid
by the reputed Muslim Sufi Saint, Mian Mir. He built another tank and temple at Taran Taran. These
temples had doors on all sides, indicating that these were open to all castes and communities.
The Guru had a well-organised central establishment which included the maintenance of a
contingent of horses and elephants. He encouraged his followers to trade in horses from Central Asia. For
his personal maintenance, the Guru also took up the trade. As such, the Sikhs became good horsemen and
formed later the nucleus of military power. All these features were important developments because they
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
were clear preparation for the military organisation that was to follow from the time of the Sixth Guru. It
was in the lifetime of Guru Arjun that his son, Hargobind, started learning to wield the sword and hunting.!>
In 1598, the Guru interceded on behalf of the local peasantry with Emperor Akbar to get the
excessive levy of land revenue reduced. These activities of the Guru gave him a new status. It was at this
time that the Guru came to be called by the Sikhs as Sacha Patshah (Trae Emperor). The Guru had come to
guide, govern and influence the lives of the Sikhs both in the temporal and the spiritual fields. It was a
significant development. The organisation of the community, according to Gupta, became a state within a
state.!6
An important step in the separate consolidation of the religion was the compilation of the Adi Granth
as the sole and authentic scripture of the Sikhs. It has a significant feature. Besides the hymns of the five
Gurus, it contains the hymns of Hindu and Muslim saints. The Adi Granth was formally installed at the
Amritsar temple on the annual gathering of the Sikhs. From the very start it was recognized as the Sikh
scripture. Emperor Akbar made an offering of 51 gold coins to the Ad Granth. Its installation at the only
Sikh temple constructed then by the Guru and the appointment of the most venerated Sikh as its Granthi
(minister) show that it was meant to be the exclusive scripture of the Sikhs and the embodiment of the
Gurus’ system and thought. In this way conjectures about links with the other systems or scriptures were set
at rest for ever. This is an important step, especially when we find that in Guru Granth Sahib no status or
sanctity has been given to any gods, goddesses or avatars.
This compilation is a landmark in the history of Sikhism. It is a clear testimony of the fact that the
Guru took this vital step to emphasise that their message and mission were prophetic. This fact comes out in
all its glaring singularity when we see that, in the entire religious history of man, no other prophet felt it
essential to authenticate his message so as to secure its purity and exclude the possibility of interpolation and
misinterpretation. In fact, in most cases the utterances of the prophets were compiled by their devotees long
after their ministry. This authentication of the scripture by the Guru himself once and for all ensured its
separate identity and purity. In the case of other prophets, their opponents can say that the prophets
themselves never meant to declare any new truths, but their overzealous followers made it into a separate
system not intended by the prophets. Nothing of that kind can be asserted about the Gurus and Guru
Granth Sahib.
It is something very extraordinary that, in line with Guru Nanak’s hymn that ‘with the help of other
God-conscious beings he would help every one to be a God-centered person’, the Guru included in the Ad
Granth hymns of twentytwo Muslim and Hindu saints. It is a singular example of the Guru’s sense of
personal anonymity. He truly felt that in accomplishing this task he was working only as an agent of God’s
mission. We also find that contemporary saints like Mian Mir and Pir Budhu Shah, irrespective of religion
and race, remained closely associated with the mission of the Gurus.
Owing to the growing religious and political influence of the Gurus, the Sikhs had got a clear
consciousness of their religious and socio-political identity. Consequently, the position of the Gurus had
naturally given rise to hostility, both in the religious and political quarters. Saikh Ahmad, the head of the
Nagashbandi order at Sirhind and a leader of the revivalist movement of Islam in India, got upset at the
influence of the Guru among men of both the communities. He had access to the court of Jahangir. But,
probably the chief reason that upset the Emperor was that the Guru had blessed Khusro and helped him
monetarily while the latter had rebelled against Jahangir. The local administration was naturally aware of the
growing socio-political strength and influence of the Guru. That this incident rankled in the mind of
Emperor Jahangir, is evident from his own statement recorded in his autobiography. He wrote that he had
ordered the execution by torture of Guru Arjun unless he embraced Islam, because the Guru had raised aloft
the standard of holiness and many Hindus and Muslims had foolishly become his followers.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
The Guru was ordered to be executed. In addition a fine of Rupees two lakhs was imposed on him.
Some historians say that, as a measure of clemency at the intervention of Mian Mir, this fine was imposed in
lieu of the sentence of death. The Sikhs offered to pay the fine themselves but the Guru forbade them to do
so. He replied to the Emperor, “Whatever money I have is for the poor, the friendless and the stranger. If
thou ask for money thou mayest take what I have; but if thou ask for it by way of fine, I shall not give thee
even a Kauri (penny).”!? The Guru accepted death by torture and suffered the first great martyrdom. His
sacrifice further steeled the faith of the community in the mission of the Gurus. Gupta, who considers the
views of all other historians as relevant material, concludes that it was principally a political execution.
A ruling administration never takes notice of a religious institution, unless it has a political
complexion and potential. The Mughal emperors never bothered about any saint of the Bhakti school. The
Sikh movement was growing into a clear socio-political body, fired with a religious and moral zeal. It
constituted a disciplined people who were being guided and led towards their ideals by a prophetic mystic. It
was this socio-political growth which no ruler or administration could fail to take note of as a potential danger
and challenge to its existence and rule. It is evident that the Sikh growth was of such dimensions that it
attracted the attention of the administration and also of the Emperor. In addition it is a political fact that the
Guru, as recoded by Beni Prasad (the historian on Jahangir), had given a very substantial aid of Rs. 5,000/-
to Khusro, leading a rebel army and claimant to the throne. Further, this organisation was of such size and
importance that the Emperor not only took the extreme step of the execution of Guru Arjun, so as to stop
altogether this unwanted growth (as recorded by the Emperor), but also found the movement and the
episode as significant enough for mention in his autobiography. Jahangir was undoubtedly right that the
organisation and the movement posed a political threat to the Empire. But he was mistaken in his belief that
by the execution of the Guru he had nipped this growth in the bud. In this background and the context of
future developments, it would surely be naive for anyone to say either that Jahangir, by this execution of
Guru Arjun, converted a simple, peaceful and innocuous movement into a military organisation, or that the
reaction of the Sixth Guru to his father’s execution was overzealous, especially when we know that by the
very nature of the Gurus’ thesis, socio-political developments and activities were an integral part of their
spiritual life. The Fifth and the Sixth Gurus had done nothing beyond the extension and development of the
foundations laid and the organisation built by Guru Nanak.
Gupta calls Guru Arjun “an original thinker, an illustrious poet, a practical philosopher, a great
organiser, an eminent statesman and the first martyr of the faith. He completely changed the external aspect
of Sikhism.’’'8
NANAK VI (1606 -1644)
While in prison, before his execution at Lahore, Guru Arjun had sent a message to his son, Guru
Hargobind, then aged only eleven, that he should henceforth maintain an army. At the very time of his
installation as Guru, he insisted that he should wear two swords, one representing his spiritual leadership and
the other his temporal and political leadership. Soon after it, he constructed in front of the Amritsar temple,
another building called the Akal Takht (God’s throne) as the seat of temporal power. This place continues to
the present day as the centre of every socio-political deliberation and power of the community. There, like
the two swords he wote, he raised aloft two flags representing the two aspects of his activities. He told his
followers, “My rosary shall be my sword-belt and on my turban I shall wear the emblem of royalty.”!? The
Sikhs were already engaged in the trade of horses and the Guru advised every Sikh to keep a sword and
maintain a horse, wherever possible. He started recruiting a regular army. He had a personal bodyguard of
57 horsemen and kept 700 horses, 60 gunmen and 500 infantry men. Thus a state within a state, started and
developed by the earlier Gurus, was consolidated by him. When this news reached the Emperor, he
demanded from the Guru the fine imposed on his father. The Guru was imprisoned in the Gwalior fort
along with other political prisoners of high status. Later he was released.
There is an important incident which brings out the religious policy of the Gurus. One Ram Das, a
Maharashtra saint, met Guru Hargobind. He questioned him as to how he reconciled his being a successor to
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
the spiritual seat of Guru Nanak with his living as a soldier, maintaining an army and calling himself a true
Emperor. The Guru replied that Guru Nanak had given up mammon (greed for money). He had not
renounced the world, and that the sword was for the double purpose of protecting the poor and destroying
the tyrant.”? These words of the Guru most clearly bring out the religious and spiritual philosophy of Sikh
mysticism, its originality and its break with the past. Persons brought up in the tradition of old beliefs and
ideas of dichotomy between the religious and the temporal life find it difficult to understand and grasp the
significance of the Gurus’ system. The problem of comprehension that confronted saint Ram Das was the
same as atose with the Nath Yogis in their dialogue with Guru Nanak. It arises even now with some of our
present-day academicians. But, for the Sikh mystic, participation in life is spiritually essential. Consequently,
the defence of moral life, reaction and responses to challenges from the environment form an integral part of
the Gurus’ mystic system. The reply of Guru Hargobind is an unambiguous clarification of the system of
Guru Nanak as understood by the Gurus themselves. This also explains the various empirical steps taken by
the first five Gurus in order to develop their religious system and organise the Sikhs in the way they did.
Saint Ram Das’s meeting with the Guru had a great historical consequence, for he was so impressed by the
Guru’s thesis that he later trained Shivaji, the great Maratha leader, in the same mannet.?!
Guru Hargobind sponsored the cause of the downtrodden Hindus and provided leadership to the
oppressed people of Punjab. In this struggle, he fought six battles with the Mughals in the plains of the
Punjab. People came to him and joined his forces because they felt that no one else had the power to stand
against the Emperor. In one of these battles he defeated 7,000 Mughal soldiers. Finally, he settled at
Kiratpur. His reputation as a military leader spread and ambassadors of the hill Rajas waited upon him.
The organisation of the Sikhs into a separate socio-religious group with political implications had
started from the time of the very first Guru. This close and integral combination of the temporal and the
spiritual life was a thesis which was foreign to the Indian tradition. No wonder that some of the people
around the Sixth Guru, including his own followers, could not understand the spiritual character of these
military developments. This explains two points. First, that the transformation of the community into a
spitituo-political organisation could only be gradual, because the Gurus had to carry the people with them.
Unfortunately, they had all been conditioned by the old traditions. The full understanding and acceptance of
the new thesis could only be slow. The Gurus, naturally, had to wait till their followers fully realised the
implications of the new doctrine and owned its responsibilities. Secondly, it also confirms the view that the
object was to organise a mission and a movement in the empirical world and not merely to deliver a message
and embody it in a scripture or a mythical tale. The scriptural thesis had to be lived among the people and
not in the seclusion of a monastery for the training of a few. The aim was to uplift everyone irrespective of
caste and creed and to show that each one, howsoever placed, could tread the spiritual path. This choice was
open to everyone and the Guru was there to organise and lead the movement. Hence, the progress could
only be gradual both in the education of the people and in the pace of the movement. The latter could not
outstrip the former. The task was stupendous. For, it had to take place in the face of the understandable
opposition of one of the greatest empires of all times.
One incident is very significant of the socio-political climate in the Guru’s camp. During a hunt
being carried out by the Imperial party in a jungle, the Sikhs also entered the same area in pursuit of game.
The Sikhs got hold of a falcon, which was claimed by the official party. A clash took place and the Imperial
forces were beaten off. But, what is important is the approval of the Sikhs who stressed, “you are talking of
the return of the bax (falcon), we are after your fa (crown).” It clearly shows the independence of political
status claimed by the Guru and his Sikhs.
The number and areas of sub-centres of preachings were extended. The Guru himself controlled
both the religious centres and the temporal centre at Amritsar. The Guru, thereby, only brought out visibly
and symbolically what, in view of the steps that had already been taken by the earlier Gurus, was inherent in
the integrated spiritual thesis of Guru Nanak. In fact secure and clear foundations had already been laid by
him. While the Gurus, and those engaged in these developments, were fully aware of their responsibility to
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
maintain the original spiritual purity of the religion and the entire movement, to some outsiders, including
historians conditioned and committed to different doctrines and systems of religion and polity, the Sixth
Guru’s work has seemed to show a departure from the original growth. But, a departure, as we have seen, it
was not.
NANAK VII (1644-1661)
Guru Har Rai continued to maintain regular soldiers and military preparations. It was a masterly
stroke of Guru Hargobind that he built a viable military organisation under the very eye of the Mughal rulers
and without serious intervention by them to throttle the rising movement. Finding that the battle of
succession was about to begin, Dara Shikoh met Guru Har Rai. But, later Dara was defeated by Aurangzeb
and he moved towards Lahore. At Rupar, Guru Har Rai met him again with his troops, but Dara was in no
mood to offer resistance and renew the fight with Aurangzeb. This incident, as Khusro’s incident in the case
of Jahangir, was, it seems, never forgotten by Aurangzeb. After ascending the throne, he called Guru Har Rai
to Delhi. The Guru sent his son Ram Rai to represent him. Ram Rai, perhaps, in deference to his host, while
reciting a couplet from Guru Granth Sahib misquoted one word of the text. This apparent display of fear
was reported by the Delhi Sikhs to the Guru. He was very unhappy about it. He not only disowned him but
directed him not to appear before him at all. This event is of considerable importance. The Guru knew that
he was preparing his people for a moral and military struggle with the Empire. In this battle any doubt or
fear in the mind of a soldier for the cause of the mission would have been a disastrous handicap. It was fear
from the minds of the people that the Gurus were trying to eradicate. They had to be taught to react boldly
against every wrong or injustice, whatever be the authority which should inflict it. This new conditioning was
essential for the health and strength of the community the Gurus were trying to build. The subsequent
history of the struggle shows that they succeeded to a large extent. Hence, the drastic action by the Guru
against his own son at the latter’s seeming display of fear.
NANAK VIII (1661-1664)
Guru Harkishan as head of the faith led the Sikhs only for three years. As soon as Aurangzeb found
time, he sent for Guru Harkishan to Delhi and Raja Jai Singh was sent to escort him. But before the meeting
at Delhi could take place, he fell ill and died.
NANAK IX (1664-1675)
After Guru Arjun, all the Gurus maintained regular military forces and equipment. Guru Tegh
Bahadur himself had fought and distinguished himself in the battles against the Mughal forces.
Aurangzeb followed a policy of religious persecution. He imposed a tax on the Hindus and
demolished and defiled their temples and religious places. Persecution was more severe in Kashmir and
thousands were forcibly converted to Islam.
The Guru toured the Punjab and exhorted the people to live courageously and fearlessly. He helped
them in their vocations. During this time, a deputation of Kashmiri Pandits came to the Guru and
complained to him of their sad plight and the threat of their being forcibly converted to Islam. The Guru
considered the matter. The crucial issue of human and religious freedom was at stake and had to be faced.
The Guru finally advised them to convey to the ruler that if Guru Tegh Bahadur were converted to Islam,
they would follow suit. Naturally, all this was conveyed to the Emperor. The Emperor asked the Guru to
desist from political involvements and keep to religious pursuits only, and that if he did so, he could also be
given official grants.” It is very significant to note that had the Guru’s thesis and intentions admitted of this
bifurcation, he would have readily obliged the Emperor. But he did not do so. Later, the Guru was arrested
and taken to Delhi. Under the orders of the Emperor, he was asked to embrace Islam. He naturally refused.
He was put in an iron cage and asked to show a miracle. His companions were hacked to pieces or executed
in his presence. The only miracle he showed was that he tied a piece of paper round his neck when he was
ordered to be executed. The paper was found to contain the words that he laid his head but had not forsaken
his freedom and his mission.*? The Guru invited martydom to uphold the freedom of religion and the dignity
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
of man. This generated a wave of resentment and set the hearts of the people in the country ablaze with
anger. It emboldened every honest man to be ready to face with determination the oppression that had been
launched against the people. A great challenge had been posed to the religious movement started by Guru
Nanak. After the martyrdom of Guru Arjun, followed the military activities of the Sixth Guru. Now, the
second crucial stage had been reached for taking yet another major step. The organisation had been built and
the military preparations made. A community bound in a common faith and cohesive social ideas and ideals
had been formed. The people as a whole had suffered acutely under oppressive bigotry. Though helpless
themselves, they were eagerly looking forward to one who should espouse their cause and relieve them of
their continuing anguish and suffering. At that time, Guru Tegh Bahadur voluntarily came forward to suffer
one of the greatest martyrdoms of history. He stood for man. He invited execution in order to awaken the
spirit of the people and the moral and spiritual consciousness of man. So far as his own people were
concerned, the leader’s obvious object was, by his own example, to prepare and steel his men for the moral
and erim struggle ahead, and enthuse them to make sacrifices for the cause of the faith and man. The Guru
by his supreme sacrifice gave a glorious lead.
NANAK X (1675-1708)
In the life of Sikhism and the Sikh community, the period of Guru Gobind Singh is the most crucial
one. Momentous decisions had to be made and steps taken concerning the religion. In addition, the
community faced serious challenges from the Empire which had become openly hostile to the Sikhs. All
these problems had to be solved and measures taken to secure the progress of the mission. Because of the
extreme complexity of the situation, there is, among historians ignorant of the ideology of the Gurus, a
general lack of understanding of the issues involved, their implications and the solutions devised. In order to
have a proper appreciation of the events and the role of the Tenth Guru, it is necessary for us to have a rapid
look at the system developed by the Gurus.
Guru Nanak believes that hawmain corrupts and destroys both the personal and the social life of man.
The only remedy for it is the path of God. He envisages a two-fold moral or spiritual progress. One is the
establishment of the kingdom of God. This involves the creation of a society where all are treated alike.
Second is the constitutional conversion of man into superman. He works for the fulfilment of a free and
creative society so as to eliminate aggression and encroachments on the freedom of man. In the Gurus’
system, tyranny is an evil, but it is no smaller evil to suffer tyranny and not to stand up against it. This two-
fold progress of man has to take place side by side, both aspects being inalienably linked with each other. It
is, in fact, a single integrated development. One could neither become God-conscious, nor be tested as such
outside the main stream of life. It is the Gurus’ way of living a total life. A Sikh was being moulded as a
complete man. That was his training and ideal of life. His orientation was not for being a mere worshipper
of the deity, nor for seeking personal salvation. His living embraced all phases of life, moral, socio-political
and spiritual.
This ideal explains why Guru Nanak is so profuse in condemning evils in all aspects of life, religious,
social and political. He stressed and commended the spiritual necessity of work, production and the sharing
of one’s earnings with the needy, and, what was most important, of treating all men and women as equal in
every respect. Further, he felt that the evils should not only be resisted and eliminated, but, simultaneously,
the society should be so reorganised that these do not re-appear and grow again. He started the
establishment of a community wedded to new spirituo-moral ideals. He himself laid the foundations of these
four-fold developments and new organisations. Such institutions take time to come into shape and develop
because they are contrary to the instinctive and egoistic urges of man.
Guru Nanak had laid down a mystic thesis in which moral life in the world had the highest priority.
His ethical system clearly envisaged the use of force and the change of the environment in order to serve
righteous cause. He organised all over the country a separate community of people. In short, he had
accepted and implemented the principle of environmental, organisational and institutional changes in order to
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
gain moral ends in all fields of life. A real sense of equality between man and man was created among his
followers.
It is important to bear this context in mind. For, it enables us to understand the two pronged
development of Guru Nanak’s religion. On the one hand, he created a new society with new aims and
objectives. On the other hand, he tried to remove the ills of the environmental situation to the extent his
new society could tackle them. The goal was the same, but the problem could be solved only by this two-
directional approach. Obnoxious socio-political institutions could be fought out and eliminated only by a
community or society wedded to new ideals. Major environmental changes cannot be brought about by
individuals alone. The organisation of a separate community was essential for the Gurus’ task of reorganising
the socio-political structure of the society. The Sikhs were not a sect of any religion. They were a people
with an entirely new way of life. Their social outlook and views had changed radically. The Sikh response to
the military challenges from the rulers was not a temporary expedient, nor a way devised to meet any
ephemeral, local or historical situation. It was a total way of life for which the Gurus had prepared them.
The Gurus continued to build and organise a classless and casteless society based on the principles
laid down by Guru Nanak. The object was first to organise such a society and then to employ it for socio-
political purposes. Later, along with the necessary training and orientation for moral and spiritual progress,
environmental and social issues were also taken up for solution. As soon as the social base and standing of
the community became consolidated, the Fifth Guru began to grapple with the socio-political problems. This
involved confrontation with the Empire. From then on the Gurus started military preparations for the
purpose.
There were two distinct issues before Guru Gobind Singh. The foremost issue was the final
otganisation and consolidation of his people into a well-knit and self-governing religious community so that it
could shoulder the responsibilities of the mission. The second issue related to the impending struggle against
the Empire. With the vision of a prophetic mystic, the Guru assessed the situation and took steps for the
solution of both the problems.
The Guru had a distinct sense of his mission. He wrote, “For this purpose I came into the world;
God sent me for the sake of dharam (righteousness); wherever you ate, spread dharanr, root out the oppressors
and the wicked.” God's own words were conveyed by him like this : “I have cherished you as my son, I have
created you to preach righteousness; wherever you ate promote righteousness; restrain the people from evil
deeds.” Again he said, “For this purpose I was born, bear this in mind all ye saints; to propagate dharam, to
protect saints, to annihilate the tyrants.”4
The Guru continued the development of his religious organisation. He created, among his people a
spirit of equality, adventure, and disregard for personal possessions and accumulation of worldly goods. The
following rules were prescribed for the service of food to the Sikhs and the visitors (panga?).
a) The Guru’s /angar should be considered as belonging to God.
b) All Sikhs and visitors should eat there.
c) Anyone who objected to eating there for considerations of caste should be deemed a non-Sikh.
d) A prayer to God should be offered before taking the food. Similarly, after completion of meals,
prayers from the hymns in the Adi Granth should be recited.
After eating to one’s fill, no one should take any food along with him.
f) Invitation for food from a Sikh should not be declined nor should the guest criticise the food
offered by the host.
g) A hungry Sikh should be fed and treated respectfully.”
io)
The Guru inspired the extreme devotion of his Sikhs. Writing in 1696, a historian describes the love
of the Sikhs for the Guru and their faith in Guru Nanak: “They cherish such faith in the Guru as is not
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
found in other communities. They utter his name at all times, and consider serving him as one of the most
meritorious acts. If a wayfarer arrives at midnight and takes the name of Guru Nanak, he is treated as a
friend and brother, no matter if he is an utter stranger or even a thief, or a robber, or an evildoer.”?° This
statement is of great significance. It was recorded when Guru Gobind Singh had already clashed with the hill
princes and the Empire. And yet, even then for the Sikhs, it was Guru Nanak and not Guru Gobind Singh,
who was deemed to be the pioneer prophet of the entire movement. It was his name that was for the Sikhs
the sole point of reference and not that of any subsequent Guru.
The process of socio-spiritual development and self-identification of the Sikh society had been in
progress since the time of Guru Nanak. It had been a gradual growth, the landmarks of which were distinctly
discernible. Guru Nanak had started the spiritual struggle and had prepared his men for it. The subsequent
Gutus had nurtured the growth of the community by the sacrifice of their lives. It was now for Guru Gobind
Singh to live the final scene of this glorious drama. It was a drama in the sense that the Guru was carrying
out the Will of God and not his own. But it was, at the same time, the greatest reality, for it was the final
phase of the Sikh society under the Gurus. The Guru knew that his mission was to spread righteousness. He
was aware of the immediate tasks he had to accomplish in the furtherance of his mission. He understood
fully well the might of the Empire he had to face and contend with. It would have been entirely different, if
the ideal had been mere personal salvation. But, a spiritual society with an ideology like that of the Gurus has
to prepare itself for a perpetual war against the forces of evil. These are always well equipped. They can be
surmounted only by the blood of the martyrs and the mystics. The Guru, as the leader of the community,
was ready for the extreme sacrifices he had to make. But, he had also to prepare his men, whom he had to
lead to victory.
For the Guru, the matter of the highest priority was to prepare his people to be self-reliant, self-
governing and capable of leading themselves. The Sikh Gurus wanted to raise the community to the level of
responsible self-direction. The Sikhs had to carry out the spiritual mission of the Gurus. They had to
perform the role not only of maintaining their internal cohesion but also of reacting to the environment in
the manner the community had done under the leadership of the Gurus. This was the dual role for which the
Gurus had been preparing them. It is for this purpose that the tenth Guru created the institution of the
Khalsa and baptised the five beloved ones as their leaders. He gave new symbols and shape to the
community. The superhuman sacrifices of the Guru, unparalled in human history, and the amrit ceremony
should be deemed a part of this final stage of self-identification of the community. It was the culmination of
a gradual process of development and maturity. It is clear that the primary object of the Guru in creating the
institution of the Khalsa and awrit was to put his formal seal on an integrated, responsible and independent
community that the Gurus had planned to build. The Guru wanted to evolve a system for creating the
leaders of the community when he left his mortal coil. It was at this time that the Guru decided to test his
men who were to be the future leaders of the mission. It was not a kingship to be conferred. It was the stage
set to select leaders who could make sacrifices and defy death without flinching. Let us explain how the Guru
started the amrit (baptism) ceremony. On the Vaisakhi day in 1699, the Guru appeared with a drawn sword in
the annual gathering of the Sikhs. In a resonant voice he declared that he wanted a human head for sacrifice
and enquired if any Sikh could offer it. There was silence in the congregation. Then arose a Sikh announcing
his readiness to sacrifice his life. The Guru took him aside in a tent. After a while, he appeared again with
the same naked sword red with blood. Again he called for a head. This time the consternation was even
greater than before. The timid started slipping away. Some thought the Guru had gone crazy. But, another
brave Sikh rose and made the offer. The Guru took him to the tent. Similarly, the Guru reappeared the
third, the fourth and the fifth time. On each occasion he made the same demand and took the volunteer into
his tent. Finally, he brought out all the five Sikhs, hale and hearty. They were robed in a new Sikh uniform.
He performed the arit (baptism) ceremony and declared them to be the first five beloved ones (piaras).
Four of these five belonged to the Shudra class and the fifth was a Khatri. As a token of their
leadership and in order to set the seal on the tradition of equality, he got himself baptised at the hands of
these five chosen ones. This, apart from signifying his extreme humility, established them as the future
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
leaders of the community. The Guru called this community Khalsa, which means the purified people or
God’s own. At this ceremony, the Guru made a most stirring speech exhorting his men to be prepared to lay
their lives for the continuous struggle in the cause of the mission. He declared that he was in the Khalsa and
the Khalsa was in him.
There is a recorded incident which is relevant to the creation of the Khalsa. At the time of the
martyrdom of Guru Tegh Bahadur, the Sikhs of Delhi had displayed fear and weakness. Instead of taking
cate of the body of the Guru, they had left the scene. Actually, it was some so-called low-caste Sikhs who
boldly took charge of the head of the Ninth Guru and brought it to Anandpur. It was reported to Guru
Gobind Singh that apprehending trouble, the local Sikhs had slipped away and disappeared in the crowd
around the place. The Guru thought over it and then observed, “I will give them such shape and form that a
Sikh can be spotted and identified even from among thousands present.’’2”
It is important to understand the five freedoms a person gained on receiving the amrit. A mention of
these five freedoms is being repeated even up-till today at the time of every amrit ceremony.
(1) Freedom from all previous religions, customs and practices.
(2) Obliteration of and freedom from the effect of past bad deeds.
(3) Freedom from the influence of previous caste or family.
(4) Freedom from the stigma or distinction attached to a calling or a hereditary profession.
(5) Freedom from all rituals, prejudices and inhibitions.
It is significant that none of these freedoms has any reference to the impending struggle with the
Empire. Each one of these freedoms has only a socio-spiritual or theological implication. The emphasis is
on the identity of the religion, the independence of its character and of one’s complete break with the past.
The fundamental nature of these freedoms is concerned with the doctrine and the socio-religious cohesion of
the community and not with any temporary or immediate objective. The creation of the Khalsa has,
essentially and primarily, to be viewed as the final step in the consolidation of the Sikhs as a religious
community. It was the formal founding of a new society. All traditional bonds inhibiting the progress and
freedom of the individual were broken. It was a salvation from the diehard customs of the past. The
individual was freed from the stigma of caste, race and profession. The shackles imposed by the old
traditions, religious and social practices and prejudices were shattered. He was rescued from his past and a
new freedom dawned on him.
Accordingly, we conclude that the objective of the Guru in creating the Khalsa was purely to serve
the mission of Guru Nanak. Our conclusion is further supported by a very important writing of a
companion of the Tenth Guru. He records that by the creation of the Khalsa, the Tenth Guru revealed and
made known what till then had been the secret goal of the Gurus and the Sikh movement. This
incontrovertible contemporary evidence is a complete rebuttal of any ignorant suggestion that the Guru’s step
was directed by any consideration other than those of the mission itself; much less was the step a departure
from the message and thesis of the earlier Gurus. Thete is twice an emphatic assertion in this book that this
step was revelatory of the original plan of the Gurus and was the epitome of the entire movement.?8
It was, indeed, the most momentous decision in the history of the mission. Internal and external
disciplines were prescribed for the Sikhs. Basically, one had to eliminate the ego and accept the path of
Naam. Externally, one had to fulfil moral duties to the society and to the entire world. Every prayer of the
Sikhs ends with the words “May God bless the whole world.” The duties towards the society were, in fact, an
aspect of the duties to the world. One’s duties to the world cannot be performed as an individual. These can
be discharged only as a community.
The Gurus not only uplifted the individual but did it through the medium of the society.
Simultaneously, the Khalsa tackled the social and political problems of the time. It was only incidental that
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
the challenges from the political field coincided with the creation of the Khalsa. The community was meant
for the purpose. It was for this role that the Gurus created and nurtured the community with their own
blood.
We record the views of Dr Gupta on the significance of the amrit ceremony.
(1) It created an inalienable spirit of brotherhood and comradeship among his men. As soon as one
joined the Khalsa, all were equal. People who had lived for centuries under servility turned into
doughty warriors, whose deeds of valour were sung by the whole world, even by their bitterest
enemies.
(2) Each one of the Sikhs was equal in status and had the same rights and privileges. Thus 100 years
before the French Revolution, principles of liberty, fraternity and equality were enunciated and
became the bedrock of the Khalsa life.
(3) By his selection on merit of the five representative leaders, the Guru destroyed the theory of
divine rights of kings and established the supremacy of the common man in the political field.
(4) The doctrine of collective responsibility was proclaimed. The five beloved ones — in the
presence of the Holy Granth — were to be obeyed by the entire community.”
The second problem before Guru Gobind Singh was of confrontation with the Empire. The time
for it had arrived.
Por any military preparation three things are fundamentally important; the first is to create the
wherewithal of organisation and equipment. But far more important are a strong sense of cohesion and
loyalty among the fighting forces and a deep and abiding faith in the righteousness of the cause for which the
battles are fought. For the last two items of moral equipment, Guru Nanak had laid a sound organisational
basis. The succeeding Gurus developed it further. Guru Arjun took tangible steps both in the field of moral
and military equipment so as to face the anticipated clash with the Imperial forces. On the organisational
side, he persuaded his men to trade in horses and become good horsemen. The Guru was not unaware of
what the consequences would be of his aiding and blessing Khusro, a rebel fighting against the Emperor.
One of his greatest contributions was his confrontation with the Emperor and courting martyrdom. Nothing
could be more potent to inspire the people and prepare them morally and spiritually for the mighty struggles
ahead, which were indeed the struggles of the spiritual man.
From the very beginning of his Guruship, Hargobind openly started to build a military organisation.
He created separate spiritual and temporal centres, both headed by himself. It would be quite idle to suggest
that on the very first day of his Guruship, Guru Hargobind could take these major steps as his own
innovation without instructions from his father. After making his preparations and testing the mettle of his
men with the Mughal armies, he shifted the venue of his organisation to the out-of-the-way hill areas, where
the mightly Mughal could not throttle the young nation in its infancy. The military preparations continued
unabated even in the time of the succeeding Gurus. For obvious reasons they did not come into direct clash
with the Empire; though, when the opportunity presented itself, the Seventh Guru did not miss it and sided
with Dara Shikoh, Aurangzeb’s rival to the throne.
Then followed the oppressive persecutions by Aurangzeb that set a seething wave of suffering
amongst the people. From the time of Guru Arjun, the Sikh Gurus had come to be the spokesmen and
saviours of the poor and the oppressed. For they alone had the capacity and courage to intervene on their
behalf with the rulers and stand up for all righteous causes against the might of the Mughals. So it was quite
natural for the hard-pressed Kashmiris to come to Guru Tegh Bahadur, who was their only hope, especially
because he was maintaining a military organisation. In view of the developing crisis and demoralisation in the
country, the Guru felt that the situation was ripe to offer a second martyrdom for the cause of moral and
spiritual freedom and regeneration of man. It was a calculated step to invite confrontation with the Delhi
Emperot.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
The principles of the Gurus’ ethics and morality discussed earlier have essentially to be borne in
mind in order to fully understand and appreciate the growth and development of the Sikh organisation and
institutions. We find that whereas all the fundamental doctrines about the mystic thesis had been specified
and clarified by Guru Nanak, the other Gurus worked only within the spirituo-moral limits laid by him. Seen
in the light of the historical context, Guru Arjun, Guru Hargobind, Guru Tegh Bahadur and finally Guru
Gobind Singh did take what seemingly were major and momentous decisions, but they were all pursued
strictly within the ambit of the original thesis of Guru Nanak. The Tenth Guru created the Khalsa and had
direct military confrontation with the Mughal Empire, involving the sacrifice of all his four sons and his
mother. Throughout, it was, indeed, the religious plan of Guru Nanak that was being unfolded and
implemented. Nay, it was the plan of God which the God-conscious men carried out.
To some people these changes may look kaleidoscopic and appear in different colours, but it was the
same light that shaped everything. Whatever be the apparent form or area of activity, it was the barriers and
the chains of man that were being broken.
Aurangzeb intensified his policies of religious persecution. It had for long been clear to the Gurus
that the Mughal Empire had to be faced if the seed of moral and spiritual life had to grow. The call had been
given by Guru Tegh Bahadur. In view of the impending clash with the Empire, Guru Gobind Singh speeded
up his military preparations. The Guru had thought that the hill chiefs would join him in his struggle against
the Empire. In the ranks of the Guru a complete sense of brotherhood prevailed. Low castes from the
Hindu fold, who had swelled his organisation, got a treatment of equality. But, this did not suit the caste-
ridden and feudal hill Rajputs. The spirituo-moral ideals of equality and fraternity affected their vested
interests. Many of them, instead of co-operating with the Guru in the common cause of man he was
espousing, became openly hostile to him. But it is of great significance that all good persons, including
Muslim saints, were friendly to him. In the battle of Bhangani, Pir Budhu Shah, a local Muslim saint, came to
his aid at the head of a contingent of 700 soldiers. Two of his sons fell on the battlefield.
The defeated hill chiefs reported the growing military power of the Guru to the Muslim Rulers.
Mughal expeditions sent by the local Governors under the orders of the Emperor had failed to curb him and
were repulsed. The Guru fortified Anandpur Sahib. On receipt of these reports, the Emperor asked his
Governors to crush the Guru.
Now another stage in the history of the moral struggle had been reached. The Governors of Lahore,
Sithind and Jammu, along with the alliance of the hostile hill chiefs, failed to subdue the Guru. He knew the
next stage would be a direct confrontation with the Emperor and the Imperial forces. He felt that as a leader
of the mission, he had to set a still more glorious example to his men and train them to rise to still greater
heights of sacrifice and glory.
Ten thousand men under Painda Khan were sent to attack Anandpur. This army was defeated. Five
times the hill Rajas and the Imperial forces attacked the Guru but were repulsed with losses. Ultimately,
Anandpur was besieged by the Mughal forces from Delhi, Sirhind, Lahore and Jammu. The army of the hill
chiefs joined them. On the first day, the attacking army lost 900 men. The siege continued. Finally, because
the supplies had completely been cut off, the Guru had to leave Anandpur. He was pursued. At Chamkaur
Sahib he was again besieged. There his two sons, aged 14 and 18, voluntarily went to the field and died
fighting.
Latif, the Punjab historian, writes the following story depicting the spirit of the Guru’s son even on
the last day of the siege. A person from the besieging commander brought a message that as the Guru had
practically no army and was pitted against the mighty Imperial forces, he should surrender and seek
conversion. At this the Guru’s son spoke, “Utter another word and I will smite your head from your body
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
and cut you to pieces for daring to so address our chief.”3° Even at this time of peril, the Guru was not
inclined to leave the place but the leaders of the community asked him to move out of the fort so as to
reorganise his men. In the darkness of night the Guru left almost alone.
All his men left behind lost their lives. The party in which the mother and the two younger sons of
the Guru had left from Anandpur was betrayed. His sons aged 8 and 10 were executed at Sirhind. Within a
span of a week, the Guru lost his mother, all the four sons and everything. But the Guru was not dismayed.
The letters he wrote to Aurangzeb, called the Epistles of Victory, are a testimony to the loftiness of his spirit.
He continued the struggle. Aurangzeb died. The Guru met Bahadur Shah, his successor, so that the
brutalities, tyranny and oppression of the people by the Governor of Sirhind should stop. The Emperor did
not respond. As negotiations to bring about peace in Punjab failed, the Guru picked up Banda, a Bairagi
Saint, and sent him to undo the barbarian misrule in Punjab. Five chosen Sikhs were deputed to advice him
and organise the attack. About 200 Sikh soldiers were to accompany them and orders were sent to the Sikhs
in Punjab to join the expedition. The Guru, as Dr Gupta writes, gave Banda Singh his sword, a bow and five
arrows as insignia. He died in 1708 as the result of treacherous stabbing by an agent of the Nawab of Sirhind.
Within one and a half years of his death, the Mughal forces were humbled. The Sikhs became supreme in all
the areas.
That was the miracle the Guru had wrought. Dr Gupta writes : “There are in this world men who
are endowed by nature with infinite capacity for attaining perfection. In the days of peace they work for the
solace of mankind, and strive to smooth the way for the chariot of progress. In times of calamity they
suddenly rise up to guide the people, and give them an ideal, great and glorious. While putting that ideal into
execution, they remain stoic to the shocks of adverse fortune. They endure untold mortifications and
sufferings, but stick fast to their ideal, and cheerfully make supreme sacrifices. The grateful world would
point to Guru Gobind Singh as one of such men.
“His dream and deeds wrought a wonderful change in his own generation in the religious, military
and political life of the people. His personality was so fascinating, so bewitching, so dynamic, so momentous
and so unforgettable that we are seized with wonder at the changes which took place in Panjab within one
year and half of his death. He was the greatest genius of his age. Whenever we touch that short life, as he
died at the age of forty-two, we are at once brought into contact with a live wire. He was a meteor that
consumed itself to light the world. He was luminous like the sun, and had conquered death.
“He possessed a rare combination of so many excellences, supreme self-denial, marvellous intellect,
super-human will-power, great heart and limitless energy. He examined life and sought its real meaning and
true goal. He came to grips with this fundamental question. He realised his deep bond to humanity. He was
moved by the sufferings he saw around him. He decided to help men find freedom.
“Guru Gobind Singh was not destined to have peace in his lifetime. He was born in conflict. He
was brought up in conflict. He lived in conflict, and he died in conflict. This conflict was not of his own
making. It was an age of conflict. Conflict was thrust upon him by the force of circumstances, and he had a
full measure of it. It was a holy conflict. It aimed at regenerating a decaying people. It endeavoured to create
a new nation. It planned to lay the foundation of a new society based upon justice and freedom of
conscience. It sought to promulgate the principles of liberty, equality and fraternity.
“At the age of nine, Gobind Singh had his father sacrificed in the cause of religious freedom.
Between the age of nine and thirty-nine, in the thirty years he had to fight as many as twenty battles, nine
before the creation of the Khalsa and eleven afterwards. He had enemies all round. He had little resources in
men, money and material. Within a week in December 1704, he laid at the altar his mother and all the four of
his sons. Besides, thousands of his devoted followers were launched into eternity. Eventually at the young
age of forty-two, he shuffled off this mortal coil in the cause of freedom and in the service of humanity. Can
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
there be a greater and nobler sacrifice than this ?- The legacy left behind by him was that of sacrifice, service,
self-support and self-respect.”
Bulleh Shah, a celebrated Sufi Muslim saint of Punjab, was a contemporary of Guru Gobind Singh.
He pays a tribute to the Guru thus :
“T neither say of the past; nor do I speak of the future; but I talk of the time of Guru Gobind Singh
and declare openly :
That but for him all the Hindus would have been converted to a foreign culture and religion.’”*!
“Victory deserves the applause of the people; but a heroic defeat deserves their compassion. One is
magnificent, the other is sublime. Martyrdom is more glorious than success. The martyrs struggle for the
great work with the inflexible logic of the ideal. They give their life, a pure gift, for progress. They
accomplish the will of providence. They perform a religious act. At the appointed hour, obedient to the
divine will, they enter into the tomb. In this stoical disappearance they leave behind a landmark on the path
of progress.”>? “As a brave soldier and leader, Gobind Singh is undoubtedly amongst the greatest saviours of
mankind.”
Dr Gupta concludes that the creation of the Khalsa and the bestowal of political sovereignty on the
Khalsa are two of the Guru’s acts of crowning glory.*
REFERENCES
This chapter is based mainly on History of the Sikh Gurus by Dr H.R. Gupta.
Guru Granth Sahib, p. 967.
Macauliffe, 1, p. 259.
Zimmer, pp. 462-463.
Ibid., p. 463.
Guru Granth Sahib, p. 730.
Ibid., pp. 1028, 224.
Sarup Das Bhalla : Mehma Parkash, 1, p. 326.
9. Bhai Gurdas, first Var.
10. H.R. Gupta, op. cit. p. 57.
11. Ibid., pp. 67-68.
12. Ibid., p. 73.
13. Ibid., p. 59.
14. Guru Granth Sahib, p. 967.
15. Gur Bilas Patshahi Chevin, p. 85; Mehma Parkash, ti, p. 395.
16. H.R. Gupta, op. cit. p. 110.
17. Ibid., p. 102.
18. Ibid., p. 90.
19. Sarkar : A Short History of Aurangzeb, p. 156.
20. H.R. Gupta, op. cit. p. 114.
21. Ibid.
22. Timur Shah, Ahmad Shah Abdali’s son, quoted by Banerjee, A.C. : Journal of Sikh Studies, Arntitsat,
Vol. II, No. 1 (Feb. 1976), p. 61.
23.H.R. Gupta, op. cit. p. 143.
24, Ibid., pp. 177-178.
25. Macauliffe, V, p. 109.
26. H.R. Gupta, op. cit. p. 177.
27. Chaupa Singh Chibber : Rehatnama.
PANNA R YON
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
28. Gur Sobba (ed. Ganda Singh), pp. 21, 32.
29, H.R. Gupta, op. cit. pp. 193-195.
30. Ibid., p. 207.
31. Ibid., pp. 148-149.
32. Ibid., p. 245.
33. Ibid., p. 246.
34. Ibid.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
23
GURU GOBIND SINGH : CREATION OF THE KHALSA
HARI RAM GUPTA
AURANGZEB’S RELIGIOUS POLICY
In Islam, the “true king is God, and earthly rulers are merely His agents bound to enforce His law on
all. The civil authorities exist solely to spread and enforce the true faith. In such a state, infidelity is logically
equivalent to treason, because the infidel repudiates the authority of the true king and pays homage to his
rivals, the false gods and goddesses. Therefore, the toleration of any sect outside the fold of orthodox Islam
is no better than compounding with sin. And the worst form of sin is polytheism, the belief that the one true
God has partners in the form of other deities. Islamic theology, therefore, tells the true believer that his
highest duty is to make exertion (had) in the path of God!, by waging war against infidel lands (dar-uL-harb)
till they become a part of the realm of Islam (dar-w/-Islam) and their populations are converted into true
believers. After conquests, the entire infidel population becomes theoretically reduced to the status of slaves
of the conquering army. The conversion of the entire population to Islam and the extinction of every form
of dissent, is the ideal of the Muslim State. If any infidel is suffered to exist in the community, it is a
necessary evil, and for a transitional period only. Political and social disabilities must be imposed on him,
and bribe offered to him from the public funds to hasten the day of his spiritual enlightenment and the
addition of his name to the roll of true believers.”
Aurangzeb was a true believer in this Islamic theory. His reputation had suffered greatly in the
Muslim world for having executed all his brothers and their sons and for imprisoning his father. To improve
his image, he became a ruthless puritan. He wished to show that his aim was to restore Islam to its original
glory. He adopted the policy of persecution of non-Muslims as well as non-Sunni Muslims.
Aurangzeb decided to use all the resources of a vast empire in suppressing Hinduism and converting
the infidels to Islam. During his viceroyalty of Gujarat in 1644, he “desecrated the recently built Hindu
temple of Chintaman in Ahmadabad by killing a cow in it and then turned the building into a mosque. He
had at that time also demolished many other Hindu temples in the province.’
In the beginning of a his reign, Aurangzeb ordered the local officers in every town and village of
Orissa from Katak to Medinipur “to pull down all temples, including even clay huts, built during the last 10
or 12 years, and to allow no old temple to be repaired.’’4 In 1661-62, a big temple was demolished at Mathura
and a Jama Masjid was erected in its place in the heart of Hindu population. From April, 1665, Hindus were
charged double the customs duty of that paid by Muslims on all articles brought for sale.¢ In May, 1667,
Muslims were exempted from payment of customs duty altogether, while Hindus had to pay at the old rate of
five percent.’
In 1668, Hindu fairs and festivals were stopped.§ On April 9, 1669, a general order applicable to all
parts of the Mughal Empire was issued “to demolish all the schools and temples of the infidels and to put
down their religious teaching.” In January, 1670, the biggest temple of Keshav Rae at Mathura was
destroyed and the city was named Islamabad.° “The destruction of Hindu places of worship was one of the
chief duties of the Muhtasibs of Censors of Morals who were appointed in all the sub-divisions and cities of
the empire.”!
Hindus employed in public service including clerk and accountants were dismissed in 1671.!! The
post of Qanungo could be retained by a Hindu on embracing Islam.!2 Others who became Muslims recetved
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
stipends, rewards, government jobs, release from jails, right to ancestral property and other privileges. The
new converts riding on elephants followed by bands and flags were paraded through the streets and bazars.'°
Jazia was charged from all Hindus from April 2, 1679. “Jazia meant for the Hindus an addition of fully one-
thitd to every subject’s direct contribution to the State.!4 The contemporary European traveller Manucci
observed : “Many Hindus who were unable to pay turned Muhammadan, to obtain relief from the insults of
the Collectors. Aurangzeb rejoices.”!5 In June, 1680, the temples of Amber, the capital of Jaipur State, the
most loyal Hindu State, were demolished.!° In March, 1695, all the Hindus except Rajputs were ordered not
to ride on elephants, fine horses and in palanquins or to carry arms.!”
Syed Muhammad Latif in his Hestory of Punjab on pp. 176-77 writes :
“He discouraged the teaching of the Hindus, burnt to the ground the great Pagoda near Delhi, and
destroyed the temple of Bishnath at Benares, and the great temple of Dera Kesu Rai at Mathura, said to have
been built by Raja Narshingh Deo at a cost of thirty-three “kbs of Rupees. The gilded domes of this temple
were so high that they could be seen from Agra. On the site of the ruined temple, he built a vast mosque at a
great cost. The richly decorated idols of the temples were removed to Agra and placed beneath the steps
leading to the mosque of Nawab Begum. The name Mathura was changed into Islamabad, and was so
written in all correspondence and spoken by the people. Aurangzeb had resolved that the belief in one God
and the Prophet should be, not the prevailing, but the only religion of the empire of Hindostan. He issued
mandates to the viceroys and governors of provinces to destroy pagodas and idols throughout his dominions.
About three hundred temples in various parts of Rajputana were destroyed and their idols broken. The
emperor appointed szullahs, with a party of horse attached to each, to check all ostentatious display of idol
worship, and, sometime afterwards, he forbade fairs on Hindu festivals, and issued a circular to all governors
and men in authority prohibiting the employment of Hindus in the officers of state immediately under them,
and commanding them to confer all such offices on Mahomedans only. About the year 1690, the emperor
issued an edict prohibiting Hindus from being carried in palanquins or riding on Arab horses. All servants of
the state were ordered to embrace the Mahomedan religion, under pain of dismissal, those who refused were
deprived of their posts. A large number of jogs, saniasis and other religious men were driven out of the king’s
dominions. The emperor reduced the duty on merchandise belonging to Mahomedans to one half the
amount paid by Hindus and remitted a number of other obnoxious taxes. Following the tradition of his
house, he, in 1661, married his son, Moazzam, to the daughter of Raja Rup Singh. In the 22nd year of his
reign, he renewed the Jaga, or poll-tax, on Hindus, throughout his dominions. The Hindus of Delhi gathered
in large numbers beneath the jharoka window, on the bank of the river, and implored his majesty to remit the
obnoxious tax; but the emperor was inexorable. The Hindus adopted the expedient of closing the shops in
the city, and all business came to a standstill. They thronged the bazaars from the place to the grand mosque,
one Friday, with the object of seeking relief. The crowd increased every moment, and the king’s equipage
was interrupted at every step. He stopped for a while to hear them, but the multitude held their ground. At
length, under orders from the emperor, war elephants were directed against the mob, and, the retinue forcing
its way through, numbers were trodden to death by horses and elephants. After this, the Hindus submitted
without further demut.”
HINDU REVOLTS SUPPRESSED
1. The Jats: Gokal, a Jat of Tilpat, revolted against the bigoted governor of Mathura, Abdu Nabi,
and in an encounter shot him dead in May, 1669. Aurangzeb sent a strong force against him. After a fierce
resistance, Gokal was defeated and hacked to piece. His womenfolk were given away to Muslims. Five
thousand Jats were killed and 7,000 were taken prisoners.'®
2. The Satnamis: Satnamis were living at Narnaul and in its neighbourhood. Khafi Khan, the
contemporary historian of Aurangzeb, writes : “Though they dress like faqirs, most of them follow agriculture
or trade on a small capital. Following the path of their own faith, they wish to live with a good name and
never attempt to obtain money by any dishonest and unlawful means.”!9 One day in 1672, a Mughal soldier
picked up a quarrel with a Satnami and broke his head with his baton. Other Satnamis beat the soldier in
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
return. The local officer sent a party of footmen to punish the Satnamis who gathered in a body, seized their
arms and drove them away. Thereafter, about 5,000 Satnamis gathered in arms. Small parties of troops sent
by local officers were repulsed. The rebels plundered Narnaul and demolished mosques. Aurangzeb sent a
force of 10,000 strong with artillery. “After a most obstinate battle, two thousand of the Satnamis fell on the
field, while many more were slain during the pursuit.”2? All the Satnamis were wiped out, and no trace of
them was left.
3. The Sikhs: Aurangzeb dealt with the Sikhs in the same manner. In November, 1675, Guru Tegh
Bahadur was called upon to embrace Islam, and on his refusal was beheaded. His companions were most
brutally murdered.
4. The Rajputs: In December, 1678, Maharaja Jaswant Singh of Jodhpur, the shanedar of Jamrud at
the Khaibar Pass, passed away. Aurangzeb immediately proceeded to annex his kingdom to the Mughal
empire, and himself went to Ajmer in January, 1679. Jaswant Singh’s two widows give birth to two sons on
their way back at Lahore. One of them died soon afterwards. The other child, Ajit Singh, was detained at
Delhi to be brought up in the imperial barem. “The throne of Jodhpur was offered to Ajit on condition of his
turning a Muslim.”?! On the Rani’s refusal, Aurangzeb ordered them to be taken under a strong escort to the
prison fortress of Nurgarh. Before the Mughal troops could arrive, their residence in Delhi was besieged by
Raghunath, a noble of Jodhpur, with one hundred devoted soldiers. There were a few Mughal troopers
guarding the mansion. In the melee, Durgadas, “the flower of Rathor chivalry,’ “slipped out with Ajit and
the Ranis dressed in male attire, and rode away direct for Marwar.”3 Raghunath and his men “dyed the
streets of Delhi with blood,’*4 and then all met hero’s death. The Mughal army went in pursuit of Durgadas.
Small bands of Rathors turn by turn, at intervals, barred the path of Mughal forces, and thus allowed time to
Durgadas to escape. These terrible conflicts every two or three hours, dismayed the Mughals who gave up
the pursuit late in the same night. Ajit and Ranis reached Marwar territory safely. Then ensued a regular wat
between Aurangzeb and the Rathors.” But for Durgadas’s twenty-five years of unflagging exertion and wise
contrivance, Ajit Singh could not have secured his father’s throne.” Jodhpur and all the great towns in the
plain fell and were pillaged; the temples were thrown down and mosques erected on their sites.”
The annexation of Marwar was followed by the conquest of Mewar. Aurangzeb’s artillery manned by
Europeans easily defeated Maharana Raja Singh of Udaipur. Chitor was seized and 63 temples in the town
were razed to the ground. At Udaipur, 173 temples were demolished.*’
5. The Marathas: Aurangzeb then turned his attention towards the Marathas. He reached
Aurangabad on March 22, 1682, never to return to the north, and died at the same place 25 years later. The
great Shivaji had passed away at the age of 53 on April 4, 1680. His eldest son, Shambhuji, succeeded him.
Aurangzeb decided to destroy him. An Englishman who was living at Karwar wrote about the Emperor on
July 30, 1682 : “He is so inveterate against the Raja that he hath thrown off his pagri and sworn never to put
it on again, till he hath either killed, taken, or routed him out of his country.” Aurangzeb succeeded in his
object. On February 1, 1689, he was captured and dragged by his long hair.2° Twenty-five of his leading
chiefs along with their wives and daughters were also seized. Shambhuji and his Prime Minister Kavikalash
“were dressed as buffoons with long fool’s caps and bell placed on their heads, mounted on camels, and
brought to Bahadurgarh with drums beating and trumpets pealing. Hundreds of thousands of spectators
lined the roads, to gaze at Shambhuji as at new kind of wild beast or demon. Thus degraded, the captives
were slowly paraded through the entire camp and finally brought to the Emperor who was sitting in full
darbar for the occasion. At the sight of the prisoner, Aurangzeb descended from his throne and kneeling
down on the carpet bowed his head to the ground in double thankfulness to the Giver of this crowning
victory.”°
Khafi Khan, the contemporary historian of Aurangzeb’s region says that at this, Kavikalash shouted
to Shambhuji :
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
“O Rajah ! even Aurangzeb dare not sit on the throne in thy presence, but must kneel to do thee
homage.”?! Shambhuji did not bow before the Emperor though pressed hard by the courtiers to do so. On
the other hand, he asked for the hand of one of Aurangzeb’s daughters. He was immediately blinded and the
tongue of Kavikalash was cut off. They were tortured for a fortnight. On March 11, 1689, their limbs were
hacked to pieces, one by one, and dogs were fed on their flesh. Their heads were fixed on spears and
exhibited in all the major towns and cities of the Deccan with the beat of drums and blowing of trumpets.*#
Aurangzeb then seized the surviving widows of Shivaji, wives of Shambhuji and of his younger brother
Rajaram and their sons and daughters including seven year old Shahu. >>
THE MARATHAS HARASS THE EMPEROR
Now there being no head of the Marathas, hundreds of Maratha chiefs at the head of their small
bands began to harass the Mughals anywhere and everywhere. It became a people’s war. Aurangzeb and his
Generals could not be present at all places. The Emperor had to face “an enemy all pervasive from Bombay
to Madras across the Indian Peninsula, elusive as the wind, without any headman or stronghold whose
capture would naturally result in the extinction of their power.”34 The Empire’s leading chiefs and men
suffered terribly. “Porters disappeared; transport beasts died of hunger and overwork; scarcity of grain was
ever present in his camp. The endless war in the Deccan exhausted his treasury; the Government turned
bankrupt; the soldiers starving from arrears of pay (usually three years overdue) mutinied.”35 The Marathas
were supreme. They plundered the Mughal territory and camp mercilessly. “There was an exultant and
menacing Maratha army always hanging three or four miles behind the Emperor’s camp wherever it marched
ot halted.’’° This happened during the regime of Raja Ram, the younger son of Shivaji who died at the age of
thirty on March 2, 1700.
After him, the leadership of the Marathas was taken over by Raja Ram’s 25-year-old widow, Tara Bai.
This young woman worked wonders. She created a new and vigorous Maharashtra in a few years. “The
Maratha queen flew from camp to camp and from fortress to fortress, sharing the hardships of a trooper,
exposed to the sun, sleeping on the ground. Tatra Bai seemed to multiply herself to be everywhere and always
encouraging her officers, and planning campaigns on a wider front. So clear was her vision, unerring her
judgement, that she was equally welcome on the battlefield and in the council chamber by the war-worn
soldiers and astute politicians of the older generation. Within a short time, the Maratha counter-offensive, at
first halting and ineffective, assumed alarming proportions and began to threaten the very heart of the
Mughal Empire.”
The enormous losses sustained by the Emperor are thus described by Sir Jadunath :
“The wastage of the Deccan war which raged intensely for nearly twenty-years, was one hundred
thousand soldiers and followers and three times that number of horses, elephants, camels and oxen on the
Mughal side every year.’
About the appalling economic devastation of the Maratha country, the European traveller Manucci
wrote :
“The fields are left devoid of trees and bare of crops, their places being taken by the bones of men
and beasts. The country was so entirely desolated and depopulated that neither fire nor light could be found
in the course of a three or four day’s journey.”
GURU GOBIND DAS’S CONTEMPLATION
The Guru knew that he had a definite mission and duty to perform. The time had come and the
hour had struck. The circumstances were favourable and the opportunity was at hand. Delay might be
dangerous. If the Emperor, the mightiest of the mighty, could be defied while commanding in person, there
was no reason why he should not succeed against the Emperor’s governors.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
A moment’s reflection reminded him that Guru Nanak had described the rulers of his time as tigers
and dogs. That situation had not changed even after 200 years. The policy of non-violence, submission and
surrender had produced no effect upon these ferocious tigers and mad dogs. Appeals, protests and
representations were treated as treasons, punishable with death. Agitation was followed by disastrous
consequences. Should this situation be allowed to continue till eternity ?, the Guru thought. Musketry and
gunnery were the only remedies, he realised.
After the most determined meditation on this sad state of affairs, the Guru came to the conclusion
that to tyrannise was bad, but to bear tyranny patiently was worse. The country did not belong to the king.
The king belonged to the country, and the country belonged to the people. If the king was bad, people must
tise in revolt. Without political liberty, religious, intellectual, social and economic freedom could not be
achieved. Political freedom could be won by armies. The armies of the suppressed people were non-existent.
The spirit of the brave Jats of Agra and Delhi had been crushed. The heroic Satnamis had been completely
wiped out of existence. The Rajput resistance was broken. The noble Shivaji had died young. His eldest son
Shambhuji had been hacked to pieces. His only son Shahu was in captivity. The Guru’s own house was no
exception. His great grandfather, Guru Arjun, was tortured to death. His grandfather Hargobind had
suffered twelve years’ imprisonment. His father Guru Tegh Bahadur was executed. His most faithful
follower, Bhai Matidas, was sawn across from head to loins, while others were boiled or skinned alive.
Gobind Das did not feel dismayed. He did not lose heart. He knew that human mind when
properly inspired was capable of rising to the loftiest heights, and when rightly guided and controlled could
work wonders. He also realised that he would have to depend entirely on his own resources. The hill Rajputs
whom he wanted to use in the national cause had failed. He set about planning and preparing himself for the
struggle to win freedom. His army was to be based on social justice. There could be no discrimination in the
name of caste, creed and colour. His soldiers unpaid, ill-armed, poorly equipped, untrained were to be
inspired with feeling of patriotism and nationalism.
In Krishna Avtar the Guru Says :
Kou Kise ko raj na de hai
Jo lai hai nij bal sit lai hai.
(No people can have self-rule as a gift from another. It is to be seized through their own
strength.)
WAS GURU GOBIND SINGH AN ENEMY OF ISLAM ?
Guru Gobind Das was determined to exterminate the religious oppression of the Mughal
Government. He concentrated against the cruel Government and not against Islam. There is not a word in
his speech and writings to prove this baseless charge. Nor does history offer any event or incident in proof
of it. He was an embodiment of love and affection for all. His instructions to his Sikhs were to treat
evetybody with courtesy and consideration. It was for this reason that both Hindus and Muslims were
attracted towards him. Muslim Sufi saints and Muslim commanders of note, and hundreds of Muslim
soldiers fought under his banners. Pir Budhu Shah of Sadhaura, together with his sons and seven hundred
followers fought hard in the battle of Bhangani in 1688, in which the Muslim saint lost two of his sons and
hundreds of his disciples. In the battle of Anandpur in 1702 Mir Beg and Mamun Khan commanded the
Guru’s forces in fighting against the Mughal troops. At the same place in 1704, General Sayyid Khan of the
Mughal army considered it improper and unjust to wage a war against the Guru. He deserted his post and
joined the Guru. Nabi Khan and Ghani Khan saved him from capture by the Mughal army. Qazi Pir
Muhammad did not confirm the Guru’s identity, while Rae Kalha offered him a refuge and entertained him
generously.
In Akal Ustat, the Gutu says :
1. “Some ate Hindus while others are Muslims. Of the latter, some are Shias and others ate Sunnis.
Man’s caste should be considered as one.” (Manas ki jat sabhi ekai pabchanbo.)
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
2. “Karta, Karim Rajak Rahim is the same. No other distinction should be recognised at all.”
. “Temple and mosque are the same. Hindu worship and Muslim prayer are the same. All men are
alike, but they are under delusion.”
4. “Gods, demons, heavenly dancers, singers, Muslims, Hindus wear different dresses under the
condition of their countries. But they possess eyes, bodies, made of the same elements,
composed of earth, air, fire and water.”
5. “Allah, the unknowable, the Puranas and the Quran are the same. All are manifestations of One,
and One is the Creator of all’!
Qo
In the Jap, Guru Gobind Das has given 735 names to God. Of these 30 are of Islam.
He declared Ram and Rahim were the same, Ishwar, Allah were the same. Barat and Roza were the
same. Puja and Nimaz were the same. Pandit and Qazi were the same. Brahman and Mullah were the same.
Sujan Rae Bhandari, while describing the Sikhs wrote in 1696:
“In their eyes, their own people and others as well as friends and foes are all alike. They love their
friends, but they do not ill-treat their enemies.’’4?
THE GURU’S MISSION
Guru Gobind Das decided to create national awakening in Punjab as it had been done in
Maharashtra by Shivaji. The time chosen was opportunate. Aurangzeb was involved in the life and death
struggle in the Deccan with Marathas. Punjab was in charge of Prince Muazzam who lived in Kabul. The
Governors of Lahore, Jammu and Sarhind had failed to crush him. The Government at Delhi was in a state
of disorganisation. The hill rajas were in revolt against the Mughals. A better time could not be expected to
fulfil his life’s mission, and the Guru was not the man to miss it. He had first tried to plant his ideas in the
mind of the warrior class of Rajputs of the Shivalik Hills. He soon discovered that the caste-ridden and class-
dominated feudal lords would not respond to his appeals and they would not fit in his ideology. They had
grown flabby possibly because of comforts enjoyed by them. He therefore turned his attention to the
downtrodden masses. He believed that he would be able to achieve his objective by stirring the latent
faculties of the human will, which possessed the elasticity of rising to the tallest heights as well as of sinking
to the lowest depths. The Guru made full use of the strong sentiment which had been expressing itself in the
Sikh community in the form of sincere devotion and loving obedience for the person of the Guru. Sujan Rae
in 1696 described the devotion of the Sikhs to their Gurus thus :
“They cherish such faith in their Guru as is not found in other communities. They utter his name at
all times, and consider serving him as the most meritorious act. If a wayfarer arrives at midnight and takes
the name of Guru Nanak, he is treated as a friend and brother, no matter he may be an utter stranger, or even
a thief, or a robber, or an evil-doer.”8
The Guru realised that God was the wielder of arms to punish tyrants and destroy evil-doers. He
was also bestower of gifts and fountain-head of mercy. Further, the Guru had been deeply struck by the idea
that God had been sending a saviour at critical times to save the virtuous and destroy the wicked. He knew
that he had been sent to this world for the same purpose. In Bachitra Natak, the Guru says :
Ll: Ham eh Kaj jagat mo ae
Dharam het Gur Dev pathae
Jabana tahan tum dharam bitharo
Dusht dokhian pakar pachharo
(For this purpose did I come into this world.
God sent me for the sake of dharam,
Wherever you ate, spread dharam,
Root out the oppressors and the wicked.)
2: Yahi kaj dhara ham janmam
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Samajh leho sadhu sab manmam
Dharam chalawan sant ubaran
Dust saban ko mul uparan.4
(For this purpose was I born,
Bear this in mind all ye saints;
To propagate dharam, to protect saints,
To annihilate all the tyrants.)
In order to seek divine approval of his mission, he entered into a blissful communion with Almighty
and received the following reply :
Main apna sut tohe niwaja
Panth prachur karbe Rabo saja
Jahan taban tai dharam chalae
Kabudh karan te lok hatae.*?
(I have cherished you as my son,
I have created you to preach righteousness;
Wherever you are promote righteousness,
Restrain the people from evil deeds.)
The Guru then prays to God to give him strength of mind to fight valorously to a finish for victory
in the cause of right and justice. He says :
Deh Siva bar mobi ehai
Subh Rarman te kabhun na tarun,
Na darun ar so jab jae larun,
Nishche kar apni jit Rarun,
Aru Sikh hau apne hi man kau
Eb lalach hu gun tau uchrun
Jab av ki audh nidban bane,
Alt hi ran mai tab jujh marun.46
(O God! give me the boon that I may not deter from righteous deeds,
Nor may I fear from any enemy, when I go to fight,
I must have determination for victory;
And I may guide my mind to aspire after uttering your attributes;
When the end of my life comes, then I may die fighting heroically.)
The Guru then invokes for the long life of all those who ever remember God and fight in the
righteous cause. In Krishna Avtar, he writes :
Dhan joyo tih kau jag main
Mukh te Hari chit main yudh bichare.
(Blessed are they in this world,
Who have Hari on their tongue and war in their heart.)
THE FOUNDATION OF THE KHALSA, MARCH 30, 1699
The Guru declared that his mission would be proclaimed at Anandpur on the first of Baisakh, the
New Year Day, March 30, 1699. He invited the entire audience to attend the grand function.*’ I was then on
a visit to the shrine of Naina Devi.
The Guru remained busy in meditation and contemplation. On the morning of 30th March, he
sought God’s blessing :
Thad bhao main jor kar bachan kaha sar naye
Panth chale tab jagat men jab tum ho sabae.
(stood up with folded hands and head bent down and said,
Panth can flourish in the world only with Your help.)
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
He entered a specially constructed canopy where a huge congregation was seated. Behind it there
was a small tent which was closed on all sides and it could be entered from the canopy alone. The Guru
asked them to utter the following call after him :
Jo bole so nthal, Sat Sri Akal |
(Whoever utters ‘The Immortal God is true’ will be blessed.)
The Guru narrated the stories of Government’s tyranny, humiliation, tortures, forcible conversions,
destruction of temples and schools, and brutal persecution of those who protested. He depicted the miseries
they had suffered from and presented pictures of fresh horrors and tribulations which lay in store for them at
the hands of the Emperor and his officials. He aroused their enthusiasm to get ready to fight against those
who trod upon their beliefs and on their very existence. He expressed great faith in the power of common
people. They were many and their oppressors were few.
The Guru then made the most stirring oration on saving religion which was in great peril, and about
his divine mission. The discourse first excited the whole audience, then enthralled and terrified them and
eventually thrilled them. He criticised the Hindu view of life. They believed in non-violence (Ahimsa parmo
dharam). They would do no wrong to others. If anybody else oppressed them they would not oppose. They
thought that the oppressor would get the punishment of his evil deeds in the next world. Instead of self-help
and resistance they practised patience, non-violence and renunciation. For want of organisation, the Hindus
could not resist the onslaught of the invaders and government. They called Hindus sparrows and themselves
hawks, meaning thereby that they could cut up Hindus as a hawk mutilated sparrows.*®
The Guru explained that in order to safeguard their spiritual and temporal rights, the people should
not depend on fate. They ought to entrust this duty to themselves. They should individually feel any national
wrong done, and collectively organise means to resist it. “The Kal age had reached such a stage that success
would come only if a brick could be returned with a stone.” Humility and service alone were out of place in
this age. To goodness was to be added not only condemnation of evil, but also destruction of the evil-doerts.
Love of a neighbour must accompany the punishment of the trespasser. Service of saints implied
annihilation of tyrants as well. Helping friends meant harming enemies too. Degh, Tegh and Fateh formed the
Holy Trinity in place of Brahma, Vishnu and Shiv, to lead to victory. Degh or cooking cauldron meant food
for all, and it was put in place of Brahma. Tegh was the only means of preserving this life in those days, and it
stood for Vishnu. Fateh or victory destroyed * the enemy and it represented Shiva. The age when salvation
was needed after death had passed. Salvation was to be obtained in this very life, here and now.
In this ecstasy, the Guru sang the praises of the Sword. “God subdues enemies, so does the Sword,
therefore the Sword is God, and God is the Sword.’”>” Addressing the Sword he said :
“T bow with love and devotion to the Holy Sword.
Assist me that I may complete this work.
Thou art the subduer of countries,
The destroyer of armies of the wicked in battlefield.
Thou gteatly adornest the brave.
Thine arm is infrangible,
Thy brightness in refulgent,
Thy radiance and splendour dazzle like the sun ......
I bow to the Sword, spotless, fearless, and unbreakable ......
I bow to the Sword, and Rapier which destroy the evil ......
In this Ka/age and at all times, there is great confidence in the powerful arm of the Sword ......
The demons who could not be drowned in the sea, and who could not be burnt by fiery arrows,
On beholding Thy flash, O Sword, cast aside shame and fled ......
Thy greatness is endless and boundless;
No one hath found its limits.
Thou art God of gods, King of kings,
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Compassionate to the poor, and cherisher of the lowly.”*!
Addressing the fighting weapons, the Guru said :
Jite shastar nam
Namaskar tam
Jite astar bhen
Namaskar ten.’?
Namaskaryan more tiran tufang,
Namo Kahg,
Gadaer grishtan, namo saithiyan,
Khag, adong abhen abhang,
(Like them no other hero is born.)
He made a stimulating appeal in the name of the country and nation. He placed great emphasis on
the love of the mother country and loyalty to dharam. He dwelt on the necessity of subverting the Mughal
Empire and building a new nation. He presented a picture of a new class of men and women ready to
sacrifice everything in the service of the nation. He put forth the belief that the time was ripe for action.
After this exciting oration, the Guru flashed his sword and said that every great deed was preceded
by equally great sacrifice. The Holy Sword would create a heroic nation after supreme sacrifice. He said that
the Dharam thirsted for sacrificial blood. The Guru demanded a devotee in whose heart he would plunge his
sword. This sent a thrill of horror in the audience. He repeated it in a sterner and more sonorous voice. All
were terror-stricken and there was no response at the first and second call. At the third call, Daya Ram, a
Khatri of village Dalla in district Lahore, rose in his seat and expressed willingness to lay down his life. He
was led into the adjoining tent and asked to sit there quietly. He dipped his sword blade into a vessel full of
goats’ blood. The general belief is that the Guru had tied five goats, and he killed them one by one with a
single stroke. This assertion does not appear to be plausible. At the first killing, the goats would have bleated
loudly which could have been easily heard in the open ground where the Guru was conducting the meeting.
He came back with the sword dripping with blood, and asked for another head. Dharam Das, a Jat of
Jatwara village in district Saharanpur, offered his life. He was also taken to the same place. The blade was
again immersed in blood. The sword was gleamed again and the Guru said: “Is there any other Sikh who
will offer me his head ? I am in great need of Sikhs’ heads.’’>+ Sahib Chand, a barber, stood up. The Guru
acted similarly. At the call for a fourth Sikh, the audience was horrified. Some fled away, while others bent
down their heads in despair. Himmat Chand Kahar or water carrier by caste offered himself for the sacrifice.
The fifth to volunteer was Mohkam Chand Chhimba, or a calico-printer.5> The Guru stopped at five. He
then ordered the curtain separating the tent from the canopy to be removed. All were wonder-struck to see
the five men standing hale and hearty. The whole area rang with loud applause and thunderous clapping of
hands.
All the five men were robed in similar new dresses and garlanded and then brought into the
assembly. The Guru declared that Baba Nanak had found only one devoted Sikh in Guru Angad, while he
had found five such Sikhs. Through the devotion of one true disciple Sikhism had flourished so well. By the
consecration of five Sikhs his mission was bound to succeed beyond measure. He further said that since the
time of Guru Nanak, the newly initiated Sikhs had taken charanpahul or water in which the Gurus had dipped
their toes. It developed spirit of humility and meekness. The times had changed. In place of humility and
meekness, boldness and pluck were required. He would therefore change the form of baptism, and would
administer to his warrior Sikhs water stirred with a double-edged dagger in an iron vessel, and would change
the name Sikh to Singh or lion. This title previously was exclusively confined to the noble Rajputs. His
Singhs would look upon themselves as inferior to no other. Every man was a sworn soldier from the time of
his baptism. His Singhs would fight against the enemies of their faith and freedom like ons. They would be
rulers in this life and would attain salvation and bliss hereafter.*°
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
The Guru’s wife did not like that the five Sikhs who had offered their heads to the Guru should be
given plain water. She immediately brought a plate full of sugar cakes (patashas), and with the approval of the
Guru put them into water. The Guru observed : “We filled the Panth with heroism (bir-ras), you have mixed
with it love (prem-ras).”>’ While stirring water, the Guru recited the sacred hymns of the holy Granth. The
following five banis were recited by the Guru while preparing the awrit or nectar : Guru Nanak’s Japjz, Guru
Amar Das’s Anand, and his own Jap, Chaupai and ten Swayyas. The five Sikhs were asked to kneel down on
their left knees and look into the eyes of the Guru. In this way, the Guru’s soul power penetrated into their
souls. The Guru then gave everyone of them five palmfuls of sweet water called amrit or nectar to drink, and
five times was the holy water sprinkled over their heads and faces. The Guru said that the five beloved ones
were his sons.°8 Individually, each was called a Singh and collectively they were given the name of Khalsa.
After administering baptism, the Guru stood before these five beloved ones and requested them to
baptise him in the same manner. They pleaded their unfitness for such a performance. The Guru replied
that he was not superior to his devoted disciples. His superiority lay in one thing. The Guru had attained
salvation, wirwan or sachkhand, while his disciples were in the process of attaining it. The Guru said : “The
Khalsa is the Guru and the Guru is the Khalsa. There is no difference between you and me.” They baptised
him, everyone of the five giving one palmful of nectar and sprinkling it on his head and face turn by turn. He
also added Singh to his own name in place of Das and henceforth came to be called Gobind Singh.
Somebody in the congregation observed : “Wah Guru Gobind Singh, ape Guru te ape Chela.”” (Bravo
Gobind Singh ! himself divine as well as disciple.)
The Guru’s Khalsa consisted of four Shudras and only one Kshatriya .
Guru Gobind Singh then addressed the Five Beloved Ones :
You are now of one creed, followers of one path. You are above all religions, all creeds, all castes,
and all classes. You are the immortal soldiers of true dharma. You are the messengers of God. This country’s
honour and liberty is entrusted to you by Waheguru. Mix freely with the world, but remain of one soul, one
ideal, and one aim. As Baba Nanak and his successors possessed one soul and one mind, so you possess one
soul and one mind in the service of Waheguru, dharam and country. You are the soldiers of God. Today you
have taken new birth in the home of the Guru. You are members of the Khalsa brotherhood. Anandpur is
your birthplace. Gobind Singh is your father. You are the citizens of Bharatvarsha. Its independence and
security is entrusted to you. Work for it with one mind. Success is sure. From today your salutation will be :
Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Ki Fatah.
Koer Singh in Gar Bilas Patshahi Das says :
Char barn tk barn pukara
Nam Khalsa panth sudhara
MEANING OF KHALSA
There are different views about the meaning of Khalsa. Some say that in Persian the word means
pute and sincere, and that the Guru had purified his Sikhs after a certain ceremony by a test of steel and
called them Singhs or lions. This is the general view which is accepted by almost all historians.
As a matter of fact, the Guru wished to inspire his Singhs with the conviction that while engaged in
the service of the Panth (community) and the country, God was always present with them. For this purpose,
he made full use of the number five.
The number five has always been sacred in India from time immemorial. The best form of self-
government provided by ancient sages was Panchayat or a council of five. Panchon men Parmeshwar (God is
present in the council of chosen five) was the famous saying in those days. The village administration in this
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
country based on this principle survived unpolluted through all the upheavals of history. Guru Nanak laid
emphasis on number five. In Japyi he says :
Panch parwan,panch pradhan,
Panche pawen dargah man,
Panche so hain dar rajan,
Panchan ka Gur ek dhayan.
Guru Gobind Singh made the best use of this spiritual sentiment. According to Giani Kartar Singh
Kalaswalia in S77 Guru Dashmesh Prakash, page 106, Guruji sent from Paonta five Sikhs to Kashi to study
Sanskrit. He built five forts at Anandpur. He selected five beloved ones at Anandpur. He read five banis
while preparing awrit. He administered to each of them five palmfuls of awit or holy water.
With a view to giving the Singhs an optimistic view of life in the midst of trails and tribulations which
lay ahead of them, the Guru gave them a unique form of salutation :
Wahe Guru ji ka Khalsa, Wahe Guru ji ki Fatah?
(The Khalsa is Thine, O Lord ! So does the Victory belong to You.)
Each half of this salutation again consist of five words. By this mode of salutation a strong link was
established between the Khalsa and Victory, these two being the offspring of the Lord.
Guru Gobind Singh was in search of a word which could have the sanctity of five and the presence
of God. Persian was the language of the elite and the Guru was himself a great scholar of Persian language
and literature. He adopted the word Khalsa for his Singhs, because it fulfilled both the conditions in the
most appropriate manner. Besides this word had already been used by Guru Hargobind for his Sikhs. In
Persian Script Khalsa consists of five letters :
1) Kbe or Kh stands for Kbud or oneself.
il) Adfor A represents Akal Purkh, Allah or God.
iit)Lam or L signifies Labbaik. The News Royal Persian-English Dictionary by S. C. Paul, 1925
edition, Allahabad, page 357, gives its meaning as follows : “What do you want with me ? Here lam. What
would you have ?”
tv) Swad or S alludes to Sabib or Lord or Master.
v) It ends with either A or H. Affor A points to Azadi or freedom. If written with 4e or h, as it is
generally the case, it refers to huma, a legendary bird. Every head it overshades, in time wears a crown.
The word Khalsa, therefore, has the sacredness of number five as well as the presence of God with
his Singhs both engaged in a pleasant conversation. God Himself asks the Singhs :
“What do you want from me ? Here am I. What would you have ?” The Singhs reply : “Lord !
give us liberty and sovereignty.”
THE FORMULA OF FIVE INTO FIVE
For the guidance of his Singhs, Guru Gobind Singh prescribed a formula consisting of five principles
each governed by five rules. The five principles were : Five beliefs, five symbols, five vows, five deliverances
and five rules of conduct.
(1) FIVE BELIEFS
The Khalsa were enjoined to have fivefold belief in God (Akal Purkh), Guru, Granth, Greeting —
Wahe Guru ji ka Khalsa, Wahe Guru ji ki Fateh, and Guru Nanak’s Japji.
(II) FIVE SYMBOLS
In those days, Hindus of respectable families wore five ornaments : gold earrings, a necklace, gold or
silver bangles, finger ring and a waist belt of gold or silver or a /agri. The wearer felt proud of displaying his
superior social position. At the same time, he ran the risk of losing these articles as well as his life into the
bargain.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Guru Gobind Singh provided to his followers five jewels which were within reach of everybody
down to the poorest peasant and the lowest labourer. Instead of creating fear in the mind of the wearer, his
five jewels made his Singh bold, brave and awe-inspiring. These jewels were £esh or long hair, Aangha or
comb, Airpan or dagger, kara or steel bangle and kachha or a pair of knickerbockers. These symbols gave the
Khalsa a semblance of unity, close brotherhood and equality. They developed group consciousness.
Several arguments are advanced in favour of unshorn hair, beards and moustaches :
1. That it was a general practice with Hindu sages and ascetics to keep long hair tied in a knot on top
and flowing beard, and that Guru Gobind Singh wanted his disciples, in spite of their being
householders, to be Aaram yogis or practical saints like Rama, Krishna and Bharata or the Five
Pandavas.
2. That the warlike tribesmen of the North-West Frontier kept long hair though trimmed, and that
the Guru wished his followers to have a similarly impressive and alarming appearance.
3. That the Guru adopted the practice of Goddess Durga of preserving long locks unshorn.
4, That the previous Gurus also kept long hair and Gobind Singh did not introduce any innovation.
5. The most reasonable explanation is that Guru Gobind Singh desired to provide his Khalsa a
natural military uniform, the least expensive and most impressive permanent costume. Besides, he
deemed it necessary that their heads should be properly guarded from sword cuts and /athi blows
by means of long hair and turbans.
Comb indicated cleanliness. Steel bangle developed an iron will and destroyed the evil effects of
misfortune. It was a permanent substitute of rakhri, a thread tied by sister on the wrists of brothers,
reminding them of their duty to help and protect them. Similarly, the dara served as a reminder to the Sikhs
that they had promised to be true to the Guru and the Panth and that promise must be kept at all cost.
Dagger depicted power and prestige. The pair of knickerbockers aimed at agility. It was more
convenient for fighting than the long dbo# of Hindus and loose trousers of Muslims. Thus, the five symbols
of Guru Gobind Singh gave strength to the body, mind and soul and developed an integrated personality of
the wearer.
(Il) FIVE VOWS
The Khalsa were required not to do five things : (a) to shave or cut hair, (b) to smoke, (c) to eat
halal meat of the animal killed in the Muslim style, (d) to wear a cap (Jo Sikh sar topidhare, sat janam Rushti hoe
mare) and, (e) to worship tombs, graves and relics of cremation and cherish superstitions.*!
(IV) FIVE DELIVERANCES
Guru Gobind Singh declared the following five deliverances for his disciples :
1. Dharam Nash ot freedom from previous religious practices and customs.
2. Karam Nash or the obliteration of the past bad deeds.
3. Janam Nash or giving up the family influences and caste effects. The Guru explained that all the
four Hindu castes had been blended into the Khalsa like the betel leaf. When mixed with sapari
(betel nut), Katha (catechu) and chuna (lime), the leaf reddened lips, strengthened gums, gave
flavour to mouth and added heat to the body. Individually, none of these things could produce
this effect. Similarly, the four Hindu castes when united would change them into a flower
possessing beauty, bloom, fragrance and freshness. All the castes were blended on a democratic
basis in which all were equal, and nobody was higher or lower.
4. Sharam Nash or the disappearance of hereditary professional distinctions, as all the callings like
those of priests, soldiers, traders, weavers, tailors, barbers, cobblers and sweepers were given equal
respect and status.
5. Bharam Nash or discarding the rituals prescribed by previous practices.
(V) FIVE RULES OF CONDUCT
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Five rules were laid down for the general observance of the Sikhs :
1. Before beginning every work or enterprise, prayer should be offered.
2. The Sikhs should help one another and serve the Panth.
3. They should practise riding and using arms.
4. A Sikh coveting another’s property would go to hell.
5. Regarding sexual matters the Guru said that his father Guru Tegh Bahadur had given him these
instructions which should serve as a guide to the Sikhs :
“O son, as long as there is life in the body, make this thy sacred duty ever to love thine own wife
more and more. Approach not another woman’s couch either by mistake or even ina dream. Know, that the
love of another’s wife is a sharp dagger. Believe me death entereth the body by making love to another’s
wife. They who think it great cleverness to enjoy another’s wife, shall in the end, die the death of dogs.”
The Guru Declared :
“Par nari ki sej, bhul supne hun na jatyo.”
(Go not ye, even in dream to the bed of a woman other than your own wife.)
ABOLITION OF THE INSTITUTION OF MASANDS
Immediately after the creation of the Khalsa, Guru Gobind Singh took another momentous decision
in regard to the institution of masands. The third Guru, Amar Das, 1552-1574, had organised his Sikhs
territorially into twenty-two districts. They were called manjis, because the priest in charge of the district sat
on a cot, while all others were seated on the floor. These missionaries were called Sangatias. During the
pontificate of Guru Ram Das, 1574-1581, they were called Ramdas after the name of the Guru. The fifth
Guru, Arjun, 1581-1606, put a Sikh of status in charge of each district. He called him by the dignified term
of masand. \t was the Punjabi form of the Persian word musannad or an elevated man of grace and dignity.
The masands collected one-tenth or daswandb of the income of each Sikh living in the area of their jurisdiction,
and presented it to the Guru on the occasions of Baisakhi and Diwali, twice a year.
The masand system worked well in the beginning at least up to the time of the sixth Guru, Hargobind.
The seventh Guru, Har Rai, died at the age of thirty-one. Out of this short life, he lived at Nahan for twelve
years. The eighth Guru, Har Krishan died at the age of eight. The ninth Guru, Tegh Bahadur lived outside
Punjab for many years, and when he came back he was involved in a conflict with the Government and was
shortly afterwards executed. The central control having been loose and weak, the masands became
independent to all intents and purposes. They began to gather riches and power for themselves, and became
corrupt.
Ram Rai, the eldest son of Guru Har Rai, had been excluded from succession for misinterpreting the
holy Granth. He established his own institution of guruship at Dehradun. Many people became his
followers. To collect their offerings, he also appointed masands. He failed to control them. Guru Gobind
Singh in his early days was living at Paonta, not very far from Dehradun. He sought Guru Gobind Singh’s
help. He said : “My masands are getting too powerful and headstrong. When I am gone, do protect my family
and property from being ruined at their hands.”
A little later, Ram Rai was in a trance. The masands said he had died. Ram Rat’s wife protested that it
often happened before and he was alive. The masands cremated him and seized his property. At her request,
Guru Gobind Singh went to Dehradun and punished them. This was the first experience by the Guru of
their arrogance and effrontery.
The Guru’s own masands had become corrupt, selfish, profligate and cruel. Frequent complaints were
pouring in against their misbehaviour. They treated the Sikhs with scorn, and persecuted them. They had
courtesans in their harems. They demanded the hands of the daughters of the Sikhs for their servants and
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
sycophants. They extorted from them good food, good beds and full service. They let loose their horses into
the green and ripe fields of the Sikhs.®
They were also adopting a defiant attitude towards the Guru. They retained a larger part of the
offerings for themselves. They opposed the Guru’s Ranjit Nagara, the huge kettledrum beaten every morning
and evening at Anandpur. They exerted pressure upon Gobind Singh to lend his elephant and the tent to the
Raja of Bilaspur. They often boasted that the Guru’s power and prestige was mainly due to their work of
preaching and procuring money.
In Bachitra Natak, the Guru condemns the masands thus :
Jo Babe ke dam na dai hain
Tin te gah babar ke lai hain
Dai dai tin ko bari sajai
Pun lahen greh loot banat.”
(Those who do not pass on the offerings received for Baba,
They would be seized by the successors of Babar;
Severe punishment would be inflicted upon them,
Then their houses would be ransacked.)
On this occasion, Guru Gobind Singh abolished this institution. Most of the masands were present
there. The notorious ones were severely punished, while others had to pay fines.
The Akbbarat-e Durbar-e-Mualla or a newsletter of the Mughal court dated May 13, 1710 stated :
“Guru Gobind Singh had summarily dismissed the masands long ago.”°* This measure not only freed the Sikh
from humiliation, but also restored a close personal contact between the Guru and his disciples.
He issued strict instructions to the Sikhs not to pay anything to the wasands, but make their offerings
to the Guru directly while visiting him. Those Sikhs who gave money to masands were placed under a curse :
Jab hawai hai bemukh bina dhan
Tab charhi hain Sikhan kah mangan
Jeje Sikh tin ain dhan dai hain
Loot Malechh tin u hau lai hain.
(When these disloyal persons become paupers,
They go to the Sikhs to beg;
Those Sikhs who gave them money.
Shall be plundered by the Muslims.)
In Chaupais 12 to 15, the Guru says he will not forgive them, and God also will not own them.
ADMONITION TO PRINCES
Besides the Sikhs, a large number of hill Rajputs and the Rajput princes of the neighbourhood had
gathered there to see what the Guru was doing. After creating the Khalsa, the Guru addressed them :
“How has your religious, political and social status deteriorated ! You have abandoned the worship
of the true God and addressed your devotions to gods, goddesses, rivers, trees, etc. Through ignorance, you
know not how to govern your territories; through indolence and vice, you disregard the interests of your
subjects. You place over them officials who not only hate you, but are besides your mortal enemies. You
despise and loath one another through your narrow prejudices, and you act contrary to the wishes of the great
Almighty Father. Your morals have become so perverted that through fear and with a desire to please your
Mussalman rulers, you give them your daughters to gratify their lust. Self-respect hath found no place in your
thoughts, and you have forgotten the history of your sires. I am intensely concerned for your fallen state.
Are you not ashamed to call yourselves Rajputs when the Mussalmans seize your wives and daughters before
your very eyes ? Your temples have been demolished and mosques built on their sites; and many of your
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
faith have been forcibly converted to Islam. If you still possess a trace of bravery and of the ancient spirit of
your race, then listen to my advice, embrace the Khalsa religion, and gird up your loins to elevate the fallen
condition of your country.”
PARABLE OF DONKEY
After the creation of the Khalsa, a large number of Sikhs stayed at Anandpur to get baptism and to
enjoy the company of the youthful Guru who was then 32. A Sikh presented a tiger’s skin to Guru Gobind
Singh. In the evening stroll, the Guru saw a donkey grazing in a field. He left two Sikhs to keep a watch on
the donkey’s movements. In the night, the tiger’s skin was fastened on the donkey. Early next morning
people raised an alarm. The whole population was terrified. Nobody dared to stir out of his house. The
Guru collected his Sikhs, approached the donkey and removed the tiger’s skin. The Guru then said : You
should be Khalsa from within and without and should not behave like the disguised donkey. Your
persecutors are outwardly like lions, but inwardly they are cowards. Face them boldly, and they will be
beaten.
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE CREATION OF THE KHALSA
1. The creation of the Khalsa was an epoch-making event in the religious and political history of the
country. It marked the beginning of the rise of a new people, destined to play the role of hero
against all oppression and tyranny. The severities of the high caste people over their brethren, the
Shudras, were set at naught as soon as one joined the ranks of the Khalsa, where all were equal
and ready to render one another every help and useful service. Their only difficulty lay in
destroying the organised oppression of tyrannical despotism of the Mughal Government. It was a
gigantic task for the small community of the Khalsa. Under the direction of the Guru, the Khalsa
took up the profession of arms and the results were most surprising. The people, lowliest of the
low, who had lived for centuries under complete servility now turned into doughty warriors, the
praises of whose physique and valour were sung by the whole world including their bitterest foes.
The Gutu’s assertion made on this occasion was fully justified :
“Chiryan kolon bax marawan,
Tan main Gobind nam kahawan.”
(Call me by the name of Gobind only if I succeed in making sparrows kill hawks.)
Its implication was that his Khalsa who were poor and unarmed and who were as docile and
innocent as sparrows would destroy the hawks meaning the Mughal Empire and the foreigners
whose constant stream was running from the north-west across the Punjab to Delhi and other
places.
2. The Guru declared himself equal with his five beloved ones. He considered them even superior to
himself when he took baptism at their hands. It was pure and genuine democracy. It represented
the spirit of the Glorious Revolution in Britain which had taken place ten years earlier in 1689. It
had demolished the theory of the divine rights of kingship.
3. Further, the foundation of the Khalsa implied that the people had the divine right to overthrow a
tyrannical government, and establish in its place a government of their own choice. In this
doctrine, the Guru anticipated the Declaration of Rights by the thirteen American colonies in
1776.
4. The Guru gave the Khalsa the social ideal of equality and close brotherhood. There was to be no
distinction of birth, caste, class or colour. All were equal in social status, and had the same rights
and privileges. He, thus, enunciated ninety years earlier the principles of liberty, equality and
fraternity which formed the bedrock of the French Revolution.
REFERENCES
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
OCNYAMNMKRONS
‘©
aa
Nr ©
13.
. The Quran, ix, 29 quoted by Sir Jadunath Sarkar in his A Short Hastory of Aurangzib (1954), p. 140.
. Sit Jadunath Sarkar, A Short History of Aurangzib (1954), pp. 140-41.
. Ibid., p. 147.
Ibid.
. Ibid., p. 152.
. Ibid., p. 150.
Ibid.
. Ibid., p. 151.
. Ibid., pp. 147-18.
. Ibid., p. 148.
. Ibid., pp. 150-51.
. Ibid., p. 151.
Ibid., p. 150.
Ibid., p. 149.
. Ibid., p. 150.
. Ibid., p. 151.
. Ibid.
. Ibid., p. 152.
. Ibid., p. 153.
. Ibid., p. 154.
. Ibid., p. 161.
. Ibid., p. 162.
. Ibid.
Ibid.
. Ibid., p. 162.
. Ibid., p. 163.
. Ibid., p. 164.
. Ibid., p. 277.
. Ibid., p. 293.
. Ibid., p. 294.
. Ibid., f.n.
. Ibid., p. 295.
. Ibid., p. 296.
Ibid., p. 300.
. Ibid., p. 302.
. Ibid., p. 303.
. Rajware, xvi, document no. 35, quoted by Brij Kishore, in his Tara Bai and Her Times, p. 70.
. A Short History of Aurangzib (1954), p. 303.
. Ibid.
. Narain Singh, Guru Gobind Singh, Gara Gobind Singh Foundation, Chandigarh, 1967, p. 16.
. Akal Ustat, Swayyas 15, 85; Pt. Narain Singh Giani, Dasam Granthi Stik, published by Buta Singh
Pratap Singh, Amritsar, pp. 82-83.
. Khulasat-ut-Twarikh, p. 70.
. Ibid.
. Bachitra Natak, Section vi, Chaupais 42-43.
. Ibid., Section vi, Chaupai 29.
In the translation from Bachitra Natak, Chandi Charitra and Akal Ustat my friend and colleague
Professor Nirbhai Singh has given me great help.
. Chandi Charitra, Part I, p. 231.
. Sainapat, S77 Gur Sobha, Harnam Singh, Lahore, 1925, pp. 18-19.
. Bachitra Natak, Nanak Chand Naz, Jullundur, 1952, No. 140, p. 126.
. Gur Bilas, quoted by Banerjee in Evolution of the Khalsa, tt, p. 95.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
50. Macauliffe, The S7kb Religion, V, p. 83.
51. Ibid., pp. 286, 287, 289.
52. Bachitra Natak, Raswal Chhand.
53. Bachitra Natak, Bhujang Paryat Chhand.
54. Macauliffe, op. cit. V, p. 92.
55. Ganda Singh, Makbhiz-e-Twarikh-e-Sikhan, i, p. 8.
56. Macauliffe, op. cit. V, p. 93.
57. Kalaswalia, p. 203.
58. W. L. M’Gregor draws a ludicrous conclusion: “The term Singh, applied by Gooroo Govind to
his followers, may have had reference to the great number of lions infesting the Punjab even in
his time.” History of the Sikhs, i, p. 23.
59. The word ‘Wahe Gurw’ is used in Pauratan Janam Sakhi on p. 23. It says Guru Nanak used it.
60. The Guru Said : “Wine is bad, bhang destroyeth one generation. But tobacco destroyeth all
generations.” (Macauliffe, op. cit. V, p. 153).
Santokh Singh says that the tobacco leaf resembles the ear of a cow, and so the Guru
prohibited its use. Swraj Prakash, 5571, f. n.
61. Bhai Nandlal, Rabit Namah, published by Bhais Partap Singh Sunder Singh, Amritsar, p. 2 “Gor
marhi mat bhul na mane.”
(Worship not even by mistake a tomb or a relic of cremation.)
62. Phokat dharam na kauri Raman. Bhagat Lakshman Singh, Guru Gobind Singh, 1963, p. 3.
63. Macauliffe, op. cit. V, p. 110.
64. Kartar Singh, Life of Guru Gobind Singh, pp. 70-71.
65. Bhagat Lakshman Singh, Guru Gobind Singh, 1963, pp. 24-25.
66. Macauliffe, op. cit. IV, pp. 316-17; V, pp. 5, 11, 12, 23, 84, 86.
67. Bachitra Natak, Section xiii, Chaupai 10.
68. Ganda Singh, Makhiz-e-Twarikh-Sikhan, i, p. 84; Kalgidhar Chamatkar, pp. 293-65.
69. Bachitra Natak, Section xiti, Chaupai it.
70. Macauliffe, op. cit. V, pp. 100-101; Kakgidbar Chamatkar, pp. 217-24.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
24
GURU GOBIND SINGH DESIGNATES
SRI GRANTH SAHIB TO BE GURU
GANDA SINGH
The two historical facts that Guru Gobind Singh, the Tenth and the last personal Guru of the Sikhs,
died at Nanded in the Deccan, now in Maharashtra, on October 6-7, 1708, and was cremated there have
been substantiated not only by contemporary and semi-contemporary evidence, but also by other authorities
of undeniable historical importance. It has also been authenticated beyond doubt that Guru Gobind Singh
did not appoint any one of his followers to succeed him as Guru and that he commanded his Sikhs to look
upon the Word of the great Masters, as embodied in their holy book, the Granth Sahib, as their Guru,
thenceforward known as Guru Granth Sahib.
GURU’S PERSONALITY
Like all his predecessors, from Guru Nanak to Guru Tegh Bahadur, Guru Gobind Singh was a
historical person who lived in this world. He was born at Patna in the eastern province of Bihar. He
travelled throughout the length of the Uttar Pradesh on his way to Anandpur and spent the greater part of his
life in the Punjab. He was neither a renunciatory recluse nor an ultra-spiritualistic saint given to slumbering
meditation, and thus beyond the reach of his fellow beings. He was, no doubt, a godly being. But his
godliness was not otherworldly. He believed and declared that he had come to the world with the mission to
protect, encourage and help the good, and to chastise and uproot the evil-doers. This could be done only by
leading an active life in the world, not in the hiding retreats of mountains and jungles, far away from the
people, but by living amongst them, teaching and guiding them both by precept and example, leading them
at every step of their worldly lives, protecting them from aggression and oppression, ready to lay down his life
in the cause, if need be. This was Guru Gobind Singh, both a teacher and a disciple — the real Khalsa — a
saint and a soldier, a man of the world and yet detached.
As the son of a martyred father, he was the subject of the attention of both the oppressed people and
of the oppressive rulers. While his people looked up to him as their saviour and socio-political guide, the
power-mad rulers looked upon him as a dangerous enemy, who was inspiring their meek and submissive
subjects with a spirit of freedom and resistance. The latter, therefore, were ever watchful of his programmes
and vigilant of his activities.
As a scholar of many languages and a writer of soul-stirring poetry, practising the use of arms and
training his men in it, he always acted in the open and kept himself in close and constant touch with those
around him. As a commander of his armies fighting either against the Hill Rajas of the Shivaliks or Mughal
levies of Sirhind and Lahore, he always occupied a prominent place within the sight of his men. Those were
the days when it was darshan of the leader that inspired and sustained them in the field of action. He created
out of the indistinguishable common people the distinct order of the Khalsa, with an uncommon form and
symbols that helped distinguish them easily in a crowd of millions.
The Guru knew no despondency and did not give way to frustration under the most adverse
circumstances. He lost not his heart at the death of his four young sons and aged mother. Two of his sons
he had himself sent into the battlefield at Chamkaur. He heard the news of cold-blooded murder of his
younger sons at Sirhind with complete resignation to the Will of God. His letter addressed to Emperor
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Aurangzeb from Dina, popularly known as the Zafarnamah or Epistle of Victory, evidently in reply to one from
the Emperor, in its style and content, bespeaks volumes for the unruffled and evercalm state of his mind.
With the cessation of war, Guru Gobind Singh again engaged himself in literary pursuits, and
completed and edited the Sikh’s holy Book at Talwandi Sabo, now known as Damdama Sahib, in the
Bathinda district of Punjab.
GURU’S MAGNANIMITY
In spite of the long-standing animosity and continued persecution by the Mughal Emperor, the Guru
favourably responded to the invitation of Aurangzeb for a meeting and set out for the Deccan where the
Emperor then lay encamped. But the Emperor died on February 20, 1707, while the Guru was on his way
to the South. He received the news near Baghaur in Rajasthan. He immediately marched back towards the
Punjab and was in the neighbourhood of Delhi when the emissaries of the heir-apparent Prince Muhammad
Muazzam appealed to him for assistance. He was then face to face with a great trial of his life. And he was
able to meet it boldly and in the right way. He was not to be deflected from the right decision by memories
of past bitter relations with the Prince’s ancestors. For him, the bitter past had died with the past. He rose
above the weaknesses of revengeful mortals and, like the true Guru and the chivalrous soldier that he was,
helped him with a detachment of men in the battle of Jajau in June, 1707. He met the new Emperor, Shah
Alam Bahadur Shah (the old Prince Muhammad Muazzam) at Agra in a public darbar on July 23, 1707, when
the royal host publicly acknowledged the Guru’s assistance in the war of succession, and in token thereof,
presented to him, a rich dress of honour, including a dhukh-dhukhi worth sixty thousand Rupees. The Guru
was then accompanied by a number of Sikhs. He kept his people in the Punjab and elsewhere fully informed
through formal letters not only of his important activities, but also of his future intentions and programme.
He kept nothing secret from the Khalsa, whom he had openly, and on many occasions, declared to be his
very image — Khalsa mero rup hai khas, Khalse men hau karaun nivas. Nor did he ever, throughout his normal
life, travel or move about incognito. In the company of Emperor Bahadur Shah moving to the Deccan, he
was accompanied by a number of Sikhs and availed himself of the opportunity of visiting the various Sikh
sangats on the way. The Tarikh-i-Bahadur Shahi tells us that, when accompanying the royal camp, “He was in
the habit of constantly addressing assemblies of worldly persons, religious fanatics and all sorts of people.”
(Elliot and Dowson, History of India, vii, p. 566).
HIS LAST DAYS
At Nanded, where he arrived in the last week of August, 1708, he performed the normal duties of
life and regularly attended and addressed the assemblies of the Sikhs and other people both in the morning
and afternoon when the dbadis headed by Nath Mall and his companions recited ballads on Sikh themes. He
was in the best of spirits throughout his stay there. Although warned on his way to the Deccan by the
Dadupanthi saint Jait Ram of the sorceries of the batragi ascetic Madho Das, the Guru visited his hermitage on
the bank of the river Godavari on September 3, 1708, the day of the solar eclipse and successfully reclaimed
him to a normal life in the world. He then baptized him into a regular Khalsa and relumed him with
Promethean fire to play in the Punjab the historic role of a valiant hero and a great martyr. Even after he had
been stabbed near the heart and his imperfectly healed wound had burst open as the result of his bending a
stiff bow, he maintained his usual cheerfulness and told his sorrowful Sikhs not to give way to mourning on
his death.
In his last farewell message, he told the Khalsa :
“T have entrusted you to the Immortal God ...... I have infused my mental and bodily spirit into the
Granth Sahib and the Khalsa ...... Obey the Granth Sahib. It is the visible body of the Guru.” (Macauliffe,
The Sikh Religion, Vol. V, p. 244.)
HISTORIC STEP
It is a very significant thing indeed from the historical point of view that he did not nominate anyone
of his followers to succeed him as Guru of the Sikhs. Those who have studied the story of his life know that
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
at the institution of the baptismal ceremony and, through it, of the creation of the Khalsa, on the Vaisakhi
day of 1756 Vikrami, 30th March, 1699, he had not only presented himself to be formally initiated into the
fraternity of the Khalsa, but had also submitted himself to the discipline which had been prescribed by him
for the new order of the Singhs (the Khalsa). This virtually meant the surrender of his high office of guruship
to the will of the Khalsa and its merger into the body politic of the new order. And this is what he reaffirmed
and declared from his deathbed. In the words of Sainapat, who was not only a contemporary of the Guru,
but was also one of his trusted courtiers at Anandpur and who wrote his S77 Gur Sobba in 1711, within three
yeats of the Guru’s death :
“A day before his death, the Singhs asked him as to the form he was adopting (or the person whom
he was nominating to succeed him). In reply, he said that the Khalsa was his very self and that to them he
had granted his robe — his physical self, and that the Eternal and the limitless Word uttered with the Lord’s
light is our Supreme Master — Satguru hamara’ (XVIII. 40-44, 805-809).”
This is supported by Bhai Nandlal, a devoted disciple, who was present at Nanded at the time of the
Guru’s death. He tells us in the Rahitnama that the Guru had told him that his one form is the formless
Supreme Spirit and the other the Granth Ji — the Gur-Sabda, the Word of the great Gurus incorporated in
the holy Granth Sahib — Dusar rup Granth ji jan, ...... mera rup Granth ji jan, is men bhed nahin kuch man (have no
doubt about it). The visible form, is the Sikhs, the Khalsa, absorbed in Gurbani (the Word of the Guru, Guru
Granth Sahib), night and day.
GURU’S COMMANDMENT
Another close associate of the Guru and the author of a Rahitnama is Bhai Prahlad Singh who has
also recorded the Guru’s commandment in this respect saying :
“With the order of the Eternal Lord has been established the (Sikh) Panth : All the Sikhs are hereby
commanded to obey the Granth as the Guru.” (Rahitnama Bhai Prahlad Singh).
Similarly, Bhai Chaupa Singh, another associate of the Guru, has mentioned this commandment in
his Rahitnama.
PERSONAL GURUSHIP ABOLISHED
Thus, Guru Gobind Singh abolished for all time to come the nomination of any one person as the
Guru of the Sikhs. After him, the Khalsa, with Guru Granth Sahib as their Eternal Guru, became the Guru-
Panth, believing in the unity and uniqueness of the One Formless, Self-existing, All-pervading and Eternal
God.
With this, the historical life of Guru Gobind Singh came to an end and he departed from this world
on Kattk Sudi 5, 1765 Bikrami, October 6-7, 1708 A.D.
There is abundant reliable, original, contemporary and semi-contemporary evidence available for
comparative study of different versions of controversial events and for sifting fact from fiction. It is in the
light of such material that we propose to examine here the last event of the earthly life of Guru Gobind
Singh, i.e., his death at Nanded and the appointment of his successor.
It will greatly help us to understand the various points of this study if we know the different types of
scholars who have written about the last days of Guru Gobind Singh at Nanded.
EYEWITNESSES
First of all there are those who were then present at Nanded or had been in its neighbourhood and
had unmistakable knowledge of his death. To this type also belong those who had known the Guru
personally, had met his companions and had received first-hand information about the end of his life.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
IMPARTIAL SCHOLARS
The second type comprises the unattached scholars who have written on this topic purely from a
historical point of view. Only such of them have taken notice of his last command and farewell message as
have studied the growth and development of the Sikh movement from the time of Guru Nanak and were
interested in the religious life of the Sikh people after the demise of Guru Gobind Singh. They are mostly
non-Sikhs — Hindus, Muslims and Christians.
ACTUAL FACTS
To come to the story of the death of Guru Gobind Singh. It is agreed on all hands that, while at
Nanded, he was one evening stabbed by a Pathan, and that his wound was stitched and bandaged by a
surgeon sent by Emperor Bahadur Shah. It is also accepted, without doubt, that his imperfectly healed
wound burst open when the Guru bent a stiff bow presented to him by a visitor.
The news of the death of Guru Gobind Singh finds a prominent mention in the Royal Court News,
Akhbarat-i-Darbar-i-Mualla, of October-November, 1708 A.D. and the Bahadur Shah Nama in a number of
places. Emperor Bahadur Shah had crossed the rtver Godavari on October 7, 1708, to quell the rebellion of
his younger brother Kam Bakhsh before the news about the death of the Guru was reported to him. For the
next three weeks, he was extremely busy preparing for the coming struggle. On October 28, the Emperor
ordered the grant of a dress of honour to the son of Jamshed Khan Afghan who had died at the hands of the
Guru. Apparently, he was the same person who had, under the assumed name of Gul Khan, stabbed the
Guru at Nanded and had fallen under his sword before he could escape. Or, he might have been the
companion of Gul Khan killed by the Sikhs while he was trying to run away after the death of Gul Khan.
On Ramazan 9, 2nd Bahadurshabi (November 11, 1708), the Emperor’s orders were solicited about
the movable property of the deceased Guru, which according to the Mughal practice ought to have been
confiscated. The Emperor, however, commanded that “These goods will not add to the affluence of the
royal treasury. It is the property of saintly people. It should not be interfered with” — hukm shud as-in amwal
khazanah-i-Badshahan ma’mur na-mi-shawad, mal-t-darveshan ast, mazaham nami shawand —
(Cf. Bahadur Shah Nama, Irvine Later Mughals, 1. 90.)
BALLAD VERSIONS
Dhadi Nath Mall was present in the camp of the Guru at Nanded and used to recite ballads in the
afternoon assemblies of the Sikhs there. One such ballad known as the Amar Namah, composed under the
name of the Guru himself in the first person, has come down to us through the son of Bhai Fatta, the
seventh descendant of Nath Mall. According to its colophon, it was completed in the month of Katzk 1765
Bikrami after the death of the Tenth Guru. As the 30th of Ka#k of that year corresponded to 31st October,
1708, the Amar Namah was evidently completed within twenty-four days of the Guru’s death. Describing it
in the first person in the words of the Guru, the Amar Nama says in lines 61-62 :
“T then resolved to set out for the lasting abode in heaven, which is the place of all peace and divine
blissfulness. My Singhs (the Khalsa) shall remain firm, listening to vars from dhadi singers.”
In keeping with the tradition of the ancient balladists, Nath Mall did not enter into the details of the
painful event. Except in the case of deaths occurring in the thick of battle, the reciters or writers of vars
generally skipped over the mention of deaths or made a casual reference to them in a prose sentence. In
support of this observation, we have the example of Bhai Gurdas. He was one of the closest relatives of
Guru Arjun on the mother’s side, and was also one of the most revered and knowledgeable Sikhs of his time.
In his Varan, he has, in a systematic manner, given brief accounts not only of the Gurus from the time of
Guru Nanak to Guru Hargobind, but also of the various sangats and important Sikhs in the Punjab and
outside. But, he does not make any clear and direct statement on the martyrdom of Guru Arjun which gave a
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
sharp turn to the development and transformation of the Sikh movement. He has quietly passed over the
event with only a casual reference to his death in a line or two.
In his [brat Namah ot the Swaneh, 1705-19 A.D., Mirza Muhammad Harisi had devoted some thitteen
pages to the contemporary account of the Sikhs, with particular reference to Banda Singh. He tells us that
Guru Gobind Singh had travelled in the train of Emperor Bahadur Shah to the Deccan and was killed there
in 1120 a/Hyri, 1708 A.D., by an Afghan, an old enemy of his, and his body was cremated.
FIRST RELIABLE BIOGRAPHY
The Sv Gur Sobha by poet Sainapat, mentioned as Saina Singh by Bawa Sumer Singh in his Pothi Gur-
Bilas ki, was completed in 1768 Bikrami, 1711 A.D., 1.e., within three years of the Guru’s death. He was an
old Sikh of his and had lived with him at Anandpur. His is the first book which could be said to have been a
reliable biography of the Guru. His narrative was evidently based on first-hand information received from
the Sikhs who had returned from Nanded and had been eyewitnesses to what they related to Sainapat. As far
as we can see, the purity of his account, though brief in many places, is not muddied with the mixture of
imaginary myths introduced later into the life of the Guru, beginning with the Gwr-bilas Patshahi Das by Koer
Singh, written in 1751, forty three years after the death of the Guru.
Mentioning the death of the Guru (XVIII. 34-37) without any poetical embellishments, the S77 Gur
Sobha tells us that a day before the event, the Guru had, in reply to a question of the Sikhs, said that he had
bestowed his physical form upon the Khalsa — bakhsh dio Khalis ko jama (XVIII-41), and that the Limitless
and the Eternal Word was the Satguru — Satguru hamara apar apara Shabad bichara ajarjaran (XVIII-43). This
was Guru Gobind Singh’s last message and his final commandment saying in unmistakable language and clear
words that he was not appointing any particular individual as the succeeding Guru and that the Khalsa under
the guidance of the Divine Word — Gurbani — was to be the future physical and spiritual representative of
the Guru.
SIKHS’ ACCEPTED CREED
This has since become the accepted creed of the Sikhs as inculcated by Bhai Nandlal in his Rahitnama
ot the Rules of Conduct. Bhai Nandlal, as history knows, was a devoted Sikh of Guru Gobind Singh and had
stayed with him for some time at Anandpur. According to the Amar Namah, line 42, Bhai Nandlal was
present in the Emperor’s camp at Nanded as one of his ministers during the Guru’s stay there. He was a
distinguished scholar of Persian and Punjabi and, out of his ten works known to us, eight — five in Persian
and three in Punjabi — are commentaries on Sikh life and teachings. One of them, the Rahitnama, which is
written in the form of a dialogue between the Guru and the Bhai, lays down the rules for Sikh conduct.
Therein, as already mentioned in one of the previous paragraphs, the Guru had told Bhai Nandlal that his two
forms were the Granth — mera rupa Granth ji jan — embodying Gurbani and the Sikhs (the Khalsa) deeply
absorbed in it. This not only clarifies but also supports the Guru’s last message and commandment to the
Khalsa mentioned in S77 Gur Sobba.
The Gur-bilas Chhevin Patshahi leaves no doubt about the recognition by the Sikhs of the guruship of
Guru Granth Sahib after the death of Guru Gobind Singh. The Gwr-bi/as was begun by its author, poet
Sohan, in May 1717 and was completed on July 22, 1718 (Sawan 22, Sudi 5, 1775 Bikrami), within ten years
of the Guru’s death. Its fourth chapter is devoted to the compilation of the holy book by Guru Arjun and
the first twelve verses of the fifth chapter to its formal installation in the Darbar Sahib, Amritsar. Therein, the
author has invariably used the then accepted prefix Guru to the Granth and has called it Guru Granth. The
following verses of chapter IV are very significant indeed.
“Hear ye all, this precept of mine as true and certain.
Recognise the Granth to be the same as the Guru, think not of any difference (between the two).
In the Kah-yuga, Guru Granth has assumed the form of Sri Guru.
Recognise Guru Granth to be the very self of the Ten Gurus. (412)
He who wishes to see the Guru, let him see Guru Granth.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
And, he who wishes to speak to the Guru, let him read the Granth with a devoted mind. (413)”
(Chapter IV old ed., p. 75; new ed., p. 90.)
FURTHER TESTAMENTS
We have available to us in a collection of manuscripts the accounts of Guru Gobind Singh’s meeting
with Emperor Bahadur Shah in 1707 (Bahadur Shab ki Mulagat ka Prasang), of his last days and death at
Nanded in the Deccan in 1708 (Guru Sahib Daswen Patshah ji ke Joti Jot Samawane ka Prasang) and of the first
battle of the Sikhs at Amritsar with the Mughal forces of Lahore in 1709 (Var Amritsar ki) during the
governorship of Aslam Khan. Copies of the first two manuscripts are also available in the Amrit Gutka
preserved in the Punjab State Archives, Patiala. According to the Guru Sahib Daswen Patshah ji ke Joti Jot
Samawane ka Prasang, which is based on the information received from the companions of the Guru himself
— Hazur ke khas Sikhan di rasna thin —, the Guru, before his death, told the Sikhs that he was not appointing
anyone to succeed him as Guru, and that he was entrusting them to S77 Sahib and the Sabda, the great Word,
as given in Granth Sahib which should be accepted by them all.
The Parchian Sewa Das, according to the date mentioned in the manuscript preserved in the Punjab
University, Lahore, was written in 1798 V7krami, 1741 A.D., while the manuscript in the Central State
Library Patiala, bears 1896 ’7krami, 1839 A.D. as the date of its transcription. Sewa Das was an Udasi Sadhu.
Writing in the style of a mystic, he tells us that the Guru had his funeral pyre prepared under his own
supervision. He mounted it fully dressed and armed, sat on it cross-legged and that his light blended with the
Divine Light — Jot meh jot samane. Heaps of flowers and scent were then showered on the pyre. After
pouring plenty of ghee thereon, the pyre was set alight — bahur baisantar lagava diya. ‘The Sikhs standing there
started crying loudly. Several of them tried to jump into the flaming pyre, but they were not allowed to do so.
When the pyre was all reduced to ashes, they found no trace of the dead body or of the Guru’s arms. “All
then so thought that the Guru Baba had gone (to heaven) bodily.”
BIRTH OF MYTHOLOGY
It is here for the first time, thirty-three years after the death and cremation of the Guru, that a
suggestion has been made by a mystical minded Sadhu of the Guru having ascended to heaven bodily. This is
only a reflection of the thinking of an ultra-devotional mind of an ascetic fed on the mythology of ancient
Hindu Puranas full of supernatural fables added to the lives of their avtars — and also of the Gurus including
Guru Nanak and his sons.
COHERENT ACCOUNT
Ten years later, in 1808 Vkrami, 1751 A.D., Koer Singh wrote his Gwr-bilas Patshahi Das, making a
liberal use of the S77 Gur Sobba. He has, however, covered a broader canvas and given an extensive and a
coherent picture of the Tenth Guru’s life. In his twenty-first chapter devoted to the death of the Guru, Pyan
Gur ker based on the commentaries of Bhai Mani Singh, as mentioned in the colophon, Koer Singh tells us
that in reply to a question of the Sikhs, Guru Gobind Singh had said that he would (always) be with the Sikhs
and that he had raised his worthy sons (the Khalsa) to wreak vengeance (XXI, 60-61).
This is clearly a reflection of the mind of Koer Singh under the influence of the brutal treatment that
had been meted out to Bhai Mani Singh, his preceptor, during the latter’s captivity and martyrdom at Lahore
in 1734, when he was hacked to pieces limb by limb under the orders of Nawab Zakariya Khan, the
Governor of Lahore. Koer Singh has also made some very disparaging observations on the lowering
standard of morality of the so-called religious teachers of his time moving about from house to house and
begging for alms. “Without meditation, these immoral people’, says he, “call themselves saints, while in their
minds, they think of other people’s women. As such, in the dark age of Kai, the real saints have disappeared
like sun in the clouds.” “Therefore, my virtuous Sikhs”, says Guru, “should acknowledge the Guru Granth
as supreme and worthy of worship” (and not any pretender saint of the type mentioned above) (XXI, 89-93).
Koer Singh then goes on to say in the next verses that Guru Nanak had himself told Baba Budha of Ramdas :
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
“Recognise Ten of our incarnations then your family will be supreme.” (94-95)
He then goes on to say:
“When the Ten incarnations disappear (from this world with the death of the Tenth one),
then the ancestral line Ka/ will not continue.”
“Tt is no longer the time for guruship : I will not anoint anyone (now).”
“Consider the entire Khalsa to have been entrusted to the protection (/ap) of the Wielder of
the Sword (47 Ket”) — the Divine Protector.”
“T have given to you to hold the sheet of the embodiment of the Word (Shabad ka rup). He
who accepts it shall be an incomparable — really true Singh.”
Recognise Sti Granth J7 as ever-ready (readily available), ever-present darshan (sight, appearance or
embodiment) of the Guru. “Bring it here to this place.” (96-98)
HOW GRANTH BECAME GURU
The Guru had by then grown very weak, as has been mentioned in verse XXX-56. The Holy Book
was, therefore, brought to him. Coming to know of it, he said : “Let us go to the Ad Sat-Guru (the great Adi
Guru Granth Sahib)”. Evidently, he could then see that his end was fast approaching. He got up along with
all of his Sikhs; took five pazse and a coconut with him; offered them himself (to the Holy Book), bowed
down, citcumambulated it with all reverence and said :
‘He who wishes to talk to me should read the Guru (Granth Sahib) and receive the peace of mind.
‘There is no other Guru equal to it. Without any hesitation, I utter this truth.’
‘There is no other Guru like it anywhere. Therefore, it should be accepted as the True Guru.’
‘With its study (darshan) sins disappear. And by realising its Word in practice, salvation is obtained.’
CXXI, 90-102)
Saying this, he calmly prepared himself for the end and desired a funeral pyre to be raised with the
sandalwood worth five thousand Rupees previously purchased from a Labana Sikh. He told his wife Sahib
Devi not to immolate herself on his pyre and sent her to Delhi. He then consoled the sorrowful Sikhs
explaining to them the inevitableness of the end of human life saying : ‘He who has full faith in Guru Granth
and does not place his reliance on anything else shall have his wishes fulfilled by the Guru. With full faith in
it, all suspicions will disappear.” He then bowed to Sri Granth, prayed in all reverence, made offerings to
rababi musicians and was absorbed in the Word of the Granth Sahib” CXXI, 124-37).
The Guru died a little before midnight and was cremated in a place enclosed by a tent-wall, a Sikh
setting fire to his dead body. The Sikhs then went out of the enclosure and stood there. Flames went up and
the body of the Guru became all ashes. “Then came all the Gods (from Heaven) blowing conches and
showering flowers and, amidst shouts of victory, took the Master away with them, with all the Heavens (/okas)
singing his praises.” (Ibid., 140, 142 and 143).
On the fourth morning, they searched the ashes, washing them with diluted milk, and found only a
dagger therein. The Sikhs were all drowned in sorrow. At that time appeared on the scene an Udasi Sadhu
and said that it was not becoming of the Sikhs to be sorrowful, for he had met the Guru in full dress on
horseback and the Guru had told him (the Sadhu) to convey his message to the Sikhs not to go into
mourning (Ibid., XXI, 144-5).
BEST INFORMED AUTHOR
Better accomplished in the art of writing, Koer Singh has not only supplied more details to his story
but has also given clarity to it. He tells us in explicit language that Guru Gobind Singh discontinued the line
of personal guruship and did not appoint anyone to succeed him as Guru. In fact, he had surrendered his
personality to the Khalsa when he became one of them at the baptismal ceremony and he publicly declared
this merger on many an occasion afterwards, and especially a little before his death at Nanded. Entrusting the
Khalsa to the care of the Divine Protector, as declared by the great Master, Koer Singh narrates at some
length the formal installation of Guru Granth Sahib as the Guru. He had been in close touch with Bhai Mani
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Singh who was a contemporary and close associate of Guru Gobind Singh and was the first person to be
appointed as the reader of Guru Granth Sahib in the Darbar Sahib at Amritsar by Mata Sundri after the Guru’s
death. As such, he was the best informed person on the subject in addition to being the most qualified to
explain the significance of Guru Granth Sahib to Koer Singh.
ANOTHER RELIABLE VERSION
Another work of the last quarter of the eighteenth century, which we may refer to here, is the
Bansawali Nama of Kesar Singh Chhibar completed in 1826 Brkrami, 1769-70 A.D. Kesar Singh’s ancestors
had been in the service of Guru Gobind Singh as dewans. He claims to have seen and consulted in his early
days a babi or account book of the house of the Guru. The tenth charan, or chapter of the book, deals with
the life of Guru Gobind Singh. Towards the end of it, in stanzas 678-83, he mentions the death of the Guru
and his last commandment saying in reply to the questions of the Sikhs : “The Granth is the Guru; you hold
the garment (seek the protection) of the Timeless God — bachan kita Granth hai Guru, lar pakro Akal (679).
Two hours (ghar) later, the Guru went to heaven; his light blended with the Eternal Light. The same night,
he was cremated after he had been bathed in rose water.” (653)
Kesar Singh makes no mention of any heavenly reception or anything else of the kind.
MOST TRUTHFUL VERSION
The account of the death of Guru Gobind Singh as given in sakhi 27 of Sakhian Patshabi Das chapter
of the Mehma Prakash by Sarup Das Bhalla, pp. 891-93, may on the whole be said to be nearest the truth and
may be accepted as objective and historical. Written by a descendant of Guru Amar Das and based,
apparently, on reliable evidence, it was completed in January, 1801. The first part of the chapter regarding
the incitement to the Pathan who attacked and wounded the Guru seems to have come from earlier writers.
But, the second part is based entirely on independent evidence. In the absence of any poetical embellishment
and unnatural, mysterious or supernatural element introduced into it, the account may be accepted as
historically correct. According to the Mehbma Prakash :
“When the Guru took the bow in his hand and wished to pull it, the Sikhs submitted that the wound
had not yet completely healed. The Guru said that there was no cause for fear. He then pulled the bow, and
the stitches gave way. At this time, the Guru said that the time for his death had come. He called the Sikhs
to his presence and he was pleased to see them. The Sikhs then asked him where they would have the darshan
(of the Guru). The great Guru, merciful to the lowly, said: ‘Our Ten forms have come to end. Now
recognise Guru Granth Sahib in my place. He who wishes to talk to me should read the Adi Granth Sahib.
This will be like talking to me. I have entrusted you to the lap of the Almighty.’ Having said this, he desired
them to prepare the biban (the wooden board to carry the dead body to the cremation ground). After this was
done, he lay down and covered himself with a sheet and liberated himself from human existence (or merged
himself in the Divine). Neither did he come anywhere nor did he go anywhere. Seeing this spectacle, all
people fully believed that the great Guru was a part of the Divine Light. The Guru’s body was then cremated
and Sri Guru Granth Sahib was recognised in place of the Guru.”
This is a simple and straightforward account of the death of Guru Gobind Singh with no mystery or
embellishment enshrouding it. And it agrees, in all its essentials, with the contemporary and the earliest
known accounts.
MOST RELIABLE AUTHORITY
Munshi Sant Singh, a lawyer of the Bedis, wrote an account of the Bedi family of the Una under the
title of the Bayan-i-Khandan-i-Karamat Nishan-i-Bedian from the time of Guru Nanak to that of Baba Sujan
Singh. It was completed in May, 1865. The first sixty-five pages of the work are devoted to the account of
the Ten Gurus which ends with the death of Guru Gobind Singh at Nanded in 1765 Brkrami, 1708 A.D.
According to it :
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
“When on Kattkh Sudi 5, 1765 Bikrami, Guru Gobind Singh was about to die at Nanded in the
Deccan, all the Singhs and disciples asked as to who would be the future Guru. The Guru then said : ‘Guru
Khalsa, Khalsa Guru. He who shall observe the Sikh rabit or the rule of conduct and morality and
meditation, him know ye to be my very Self.’ Then thinking that there should be a difinite centre of faith for
all the Sikhs, the Guru with five paise and a coconut in his hand (as offering) bowed before Guru Granth
Sahib and said : ‘Ye all community should recognise Guru Granth Sahib as the Guru after me and obey the
commandments contained therein.” And then he uttered the following couplet :
‘Recognise the Guru Granth as the visible body of the Guru.
The Sikh who wishes to meet me should find me therein.”
In this, the author of the Bayan has reiterated the last commandment of Guru Gobind Singh in the
words of his contemporaty and well-known disciple Bhai Nandlal who was present at Nanded at the time of
the Guru’s death. There could be no better and more reliable authority than him on the subject.
The author of the Bayan is all devotion and praise for Baba Sahib Singh Bedi of Una, whom he has
called ‘Guru Sahib’, throughout his book. He also tells us that, according to Guru Gobind Singh’s promise,
he was reborn in the house of Baba Kaladhari Bedi as his grandson — Sahib Singh (pp. 57-58, 66). But in
spite of it, Munshi Sant Singh does not claim formal guruship for him in place of the Tenth Guru, who, he
says, had formally declared Guru Granth Sahib to be the Guru after him. Born in 1756, A.D., within forty-
eight years of the Tenth Guru’s death and being the most respected Sikh of his time, commanding
overwhelming influence with the Sikh Sardars, Rajas and Maharaja Ranjit Singh, he had a better chance than
all the later pretenders. Baba Sahib Singh, however, preferred to be a humble disciple, a Sikh of Guru
Gobind Singh — a Khalsa — than to pretend to be an equal of his. In 1780, he presented himself at Dera
Guru Tegh Bahadur at Anandpur and received Khande ki Pabul, the amrit of the Khalsa, there. According to
the Bayan, Baba Sahib Singh was the first of the Bedis to receive the Khalsa baptism, which he himself later
on administered from time to time to a large number of Sikhs throughout the country.
HISTORICAL WORKS
Having referred to official records, contemporary works and hagiological literature, we now come to
historical works of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries based on the information available to, or collected
by, professional historians. They are either in Persian or in English. The works written by Indian scholars,
both Hindu and Muslim, are in Persian while those of the Europeans are in English. As almost all the Indian
writers belonged to the Punjab or its neighbourhood, they had either lived amongst the Sikhs as neighbours
or had close associations with them in day-to-day life. As such, most of them had first-hand knowledge of
the prevalent beliefs, practices and ceremonies of the Sikhs and could, therefore, speak with a certain amount
of authority. Some of them might have differed with the Sikhs in matters theological or might as well have
had political prejudices against them, but about the broad facts of their history, there could be no misgivings.
Moreover, as writers, they are expected to be impartial and objective. And to be as near the truth as possible,
they must have relevant sources. As the subject under our immediate study here belongs to the prevalent
beliefs of the Sikhs through the centuries and is purely historical, their mention in the historical works of the
eighteenth and nineteenth centuries carries special weight with students of history and cannot be ignored by
serious scholars.
IMPORTANT MUSLIM ACCOUNTS
We have already referred to the contemporary accounts of Mirza Muhammad Harisi’s [brat Namah
(1705-19 A.D.). To almost the same period belongs Sayyed Muhammad Qasim Husaini Lahauri’s [brat
Namah (1135 al-Hyri, 1722 A.D.) and Ibrat Magal (1144 A.H., 1731 A.D.) written within fourteen and twenty-
three years, respectively, of the death of Guru Gobind Singh. Giving the usual account of the Guru having
died of the wound inflicted on him with a dagger by a Pathan at Nanded, Muhammad Qasim tells us that the
Guru’s body was cremated by his disciples with aloe and sandal wood according to the necessary Sikh rites
(p. 36).
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Muhammad Ali Khan Ansari has to his credit two very important historical works, the Tarikh-i-
Mugaffari (1225 A.H., 1810 A.D.) and the Tarikh-i-Bahr-ul-Mawwaj, carrying the history of the Mughals to the
beginning of the reign of Akbar Shah II (1806-37 A.D.). These works deal extensively with the struggles of
the Sikhs against the Mughals and Durranis, and are considered to be important sources on the history of the
Punjab during the eighteenth century. Before the end of Guru Gobind Singh’s account, Muhammad Ali
Khan writes that “after him (Guru Gobind Singh), according to the faith of these people (the Sikhs), the
descending of guruship and of internal spiritualism came to end and the book, the Granth, was established in
place of Guru” (Tarikh-i-Muzaffari, p.152; Tarikh-t-Bahr-ul-Mawwa, p. 208).
At the same time in 1810 A.D. (1225 A.H.) was completed Ahmed-bin-Muhammad Ali’s M@rat-u/-
Abwal-i-lahan Numa. According to it, “the sons of Guru Gobind had been killed in the battle of Alamgir.
After him there is no Khalifah (successor, Guru).”
SUPPORTERS OF CONVENTIONAL VERSION
Rai Chatarman, the author of the Chahar Gulshan Akhbar-un-Nawadar, also known as the Chatar
Gulshan ot Khulasat-un-Nawadir, compiled his work in 1759 soon after the death of Mata Sundri about whom,
and about Ajit Singh, her adopted son, and Mata Sahib Devi, he seems to be well-informed. According to
him, the Pathan’s dagger put an end to the Guru’s life. “As declared by Guru Nanak”, says he, “there are Ten
persons (to be recognised). These Ten Khalifabs (Gurus) ate called Das Mahal. Anyone else sitting on the
gaddi after them is not acceptable to them (the Sikhs). Some recognise him (Ajit Singh, the adopted son of
Mata Sundri). He was later disowned by Mata Sundri” (pp. 35-36).
In the Maima-ul-Akhbar (1214-20 A.H., 1799 A.D.), its author Har-Sukh Rai says about Guru
Gobind Singh that “He is the Tenth Maha/ and is the last Zahur (appearance or successor) of Guru Nanak”
(p. 481).
EUROPEAN VERSIONS
This was the time when Maharaja Ranjit Singh had been on the throne of Lahore for some eleven
years. He had occupied the traditional capital of the Punjab in 1799 A.D. and had fully established himself as
the undisputed Maharaja of the Land of the Five Rivers. He had not only been accepted as such by a number
of Muslim, Hindu and Sikh chieftains, but had also been recognised by the greatest foreign power in India,
the British East India Company, which had entered into a political treaty with him. This attracted the
attention of a number of British and Indian scholars, who wrote historical works devoted exclusively to the
Sikhs. A few pamphlets, it is true, had also been written on the Sikhs in the eighteenth century by men like
Antoine L. H. Polier (1780), William Franklin (1798-1803), etc., but they were too sketchy to contain any
detailed account of the Sikh Gurus. George Forster alone has referred to the Gurus in his Letter No. XI in
1783 in his _A Journey from Bengal to England and says :
“Govind Singh was assassinated during this expedition (of Emperor Bahadur Shah to the Deccan) by
a Pathan soldier and he died of his wounds in 1708 at the town of Nanded without leaving any male issue;
and a tradition delivered to the Szques, limiting their priests to the number of ten, induced them to appoint no
successors to Govind Singh” (Vol. I, pub. 1798, p. 263).
Talking about the change in the inscription on the Sikh coins, Major James Brown has casually
referred to Guru Nanak and Guru Gobind Singh as the first and the last Gurus of the Sikhs, respectively, and
has indirectly given us the confirmed belief of the Sikhs of about 1787-88. He says in his Héstory of the Origin
and Progress of the Sikhs, published in 1788 :
satis but after they had been current about fifteen years, the grand Diet of the Sikh chiefs (called
Goormutta) determined to call in all those Rupees, and to strike them in the names of Gooroo Nanuck and
Gooroo Gobind Singh, the first and last of their Gooroos or religious leaders (pp. vi, viit).”
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
RELIABLE INDIAN WRITERS
In referring to the historians of the nineteenth century, we would prefer to mention at first the
Indian writers who should presumably be better informed about the Sikh Gurus than Europeans. It may,
however, be mentioned that some of the Indian writers wrote their books at the instance of Europeans, who
were at this time feeling interested in the history and religion of the Sikhs, with whom they expected to come
in close political contact in the near future. For this purpose, they desired to obtain as correct and reliable
information as possible.
Khushwaqt Rat’s Tarikh-i-Sikhan, also called the Kétab-i-Tawarikh-i-Punjab, was written in 1811.
Therein he says that, “at Afzal (Abchal) Nagar (Nanded) the Guru purchased a piece of land and moved in all
happiness from this transitory world to the world Eternal. The disciples of the Guru collected from all sides
and cremated his body with aloe and sandalwood with all the necessary rites ...... This event, that is his death,
took place on Kattk Sudi 5, 1765 Bikrami. The generation (of Gurus) of Guru Nanak up to Guru Gobind
Singh came to an end” (pp. 36b-37a).
In 1233 a/-Hyri, 1817-18 A.D. was completed Ahmad Shah Batalia’s Tawarikh-i-Hind : Bayan-i-Ahwal-i-
Mulk-i-Hind wa Maluk-i-an ax Zaman-i-qadim ta 1233 Hyri, a part of which, the Zikr-i-Guruan wa ibtida-i-Singhan
wa Maxhab-i-eshan, forms an appendix to Daftar I and II of the Umdat-u-Tawarikh by Munshi Sohan Lal Suri.
In it, Ahmad Shah tells us that Guru Gobind Singh, who had accompanied Emperor Bahadur Shah to the
Deccan, died at Nanded in 1756 Bikrami, 1708 A.D. and that the place was known as Abchal Nagar. He says
that some Sikhs also lived there and that the Nizam of Hyderabad had fixed a daily allowance for them. In
addition to it, Maharaja Ranjit Singh also made handsome donations for the upkeep of the sanctuary and the
maintenance of its custodians (p. 11).
OUTSTANDING WORK
The Umdat-u-Tawarikh of Lala Sohan Lal Suri is a very important work on the reign of Maharaja
Ranjit Singh and his successors up to 1849. Although its first volume dealing with the Guru and the mis/
period was published in 1885, it was originally begun in the form of notes somewhere in the middle of the
eighteenth century during the time of Sohan Lal Suri’s grandfather and father, Lala Hakumat Rai and Lala
Ganpat Rai. It tells us that during the last moments of Guru Gobind Singh’s life, a disciple of his asked him
as to whom he had appointed as Guru after him. Thereupon, the Guru replied, “the Guru is Granth jz.
There is no difference between the Granth and the Guru. From the darshan of Granth Ji, one shall have the
happy darshan of the Guru Sahib” (Vol. I, pp. 64-65).
So intense was the faith of Maharaja Ranjit Singh in Guru Gobind Singh and so ardent was his desire
to raise a befitting memorial on his last resting place at Nanded, that he occasionally sent large sums of
money and a number of his men for the purpose all the way from the Punjab. The name of one Sardar
Chanda Singh is mentioned in the Umdat-u-Tawarikh (Vol. I, patt iti, p. 355) as having been deputed by him
on the Ist of Magh, 1893 Bikrami, to proceed to Abchal Nagar with twenty-five thousand Rupees, with
promise to remit more money, for the renovation and construction of buildings of the Sachkhand gurdwara
there. (Also see Ibid. III, iti, pp. 77, 187, 267, 455).
Ratan Chand Bal, the author of the Khalis Namah (1846 A.D., p. 13b. 14a) and Ganesh Das Badehra
of the Char Bagh-i-Panjab (1855 A.D., p. 118) also confirm the information about the death of the Guru.
MUSLIM CONFIRMATION
Ghulam Muhy-ud-Din alias Bute Shah in his Tarikb-i-Panjab (1848, p. 206) and Mufti-Ali-ud-Din in
his [brat Namah of 1854 (Vol. I, p. 178) have both recorded the death of the Guru as an historical fact. Bute
Shah in his abridged recension of the Tarikh-i-Panjab (preserved in the Punjab Public Library, Lahore) has
followed Lala Sohan Lal’s Umdat-ut-Tawarikh in recording the last commandment of the Guru regarding the
Granth being the Guru after his death and that “there is no difference between the Guru and the Granth”
(p. 62).
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
The last Persian work to furnish a reference on the subject is Kanhaiya Lal Hindi’s Zafar Namah-i-
Ranjit Singh published in Lahore in 1876. In the introductory pages, he has given a sketch of the Gurus at the
end of which he says that “Guru Gobind Singh died at Abchal Nagar (Nanded in the Deccan) in 1765
Bikrami and that no one (of his disciples) succeeded him to the gaddi (throne of Guruship). With him ended
the gaddi of leadership (masnad-i-sarwari and with him came to end the custom of the (succession of) Gurus
(shewa-i-rabbariy” (p. 52).
OBJECTIVE EUROPEANS
European writers on history are generally more objective and precise, and those who have written on
the Sikhs in the first half of the nineteenth century were seasoned scholars like Sir John Malcolm, the Hon’ble
W. G. Osborne, Dr W. L. M’Gregor and Captain Joseph D. Cunningham. The last of them incurred the
displeasure of his superiors and lost his political appointment for his frank and honest observations in his
History of the Sikhs. All of them had been in close contact with the Sikhs in the Punjab and may be safely
relied upon for their information on the historicity of Guru Gobind Singh’s death, of his being the Tenth and
the last living Guru of the Sikhs and of his declaration and commandment regarding Guru Granth Sahib
being the Guru after him. We would, therefore, quote here only the relevant passages from their works
without going into any particulars about them, following only the chronological order of their publication.
Malcolm Lt. Col., Sketch of the Sikhs, London, 1812.
Osborne, W. G., The Court and Camp of Ranjeet Singh, London, 1840.
“The Tenth and the last of their spiritual leaders was called Gooroo Govind, whose plans of
>
ambition were different from those of his predecessor Nanak ...... (p. xiv).
“We accordingly set the old Faqueer Uzeezoodeen to work with him, and much to our satisfaction,
heard, in the course of the evening, that on his mentioning our wishes to the Maharaja, he had consulted the
Granth, ot sacred volume of the Sikhs, and that, as the oracle was propitious, we might be prepared to set off
for Lahore in four days’ time.” (p. 121)
“Ranjeet Singh rarely undertakes any expedition of importance without consulting this holy book
“Guru Govind was the last acknowledged religious ruler of the Sikhs. A prophecy had limited their
spiritual guides to the number of ten: ......” (p. 76).
“This sect, as has been before stated, have never admitted a spiritual leader since the death of Guru
Govind.” (p. 89)
M’Gtegor, W. L. The History of the Sikhs, London, 1846, Vol. I.
“The wound was sewed up, and to all appearance, healing, but Govind was determined to die. He
called for a strong bow, which he bent with all his force, and in doing so, the stitches of his wound gave way,
his bowels again protruded, and he died almost immediately ”.
“This event occurred in the year of the Hera 1132, Samwat 1765, and A.D. 1708, at the city of
Nadshur (Nanded) in the reign of Buhadoor Shah.” (p. 100)
“Aware that since the death of his brave sons there was none among his adherents capable of
following up his views and conquests, he fixed upon a Byragee fukeer, named Bunda who became his successor,
though not as Gooroo. That title died with Gobind Singh, the Tenth and last.” (p. 104)
Cunningham, J. D. History of the Sikhs, 1849.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
“The expiring Gooroo was childless, and the assembled disciples asked in sorrow who should inspire
them with truth and lead them to victory when he was no more. Govind bade them be of good cheer; the
appointed Ten had indeed fulfilled their mission, but he was about to deliever the Khalsa to God, the never
dying. ‘He who wishes to behold the Gooroo, let him search the Granth of Nanak. The Gooroo will dwell
with the Khalsa : be firm and faithful; wherever five Sikhs are gathered together, there will I also be present.”
(p. 88)
“Govind was killed in 1708 at Nuderh on the banks of the Godavery.” (pp. 88-89)
Trumpp, Ernest, Te Adi Granth, 1877.
“The Guru felt that his dissolution was near at hand, and ordered his Sikhs to keep ready wood (for
cremation) and shroud. Having done so, they all joined their hands and asked : ‘O true Guru, whom will you
seat, for the sake of our welfare, on the throne of the Guruship ? He answered : ‘As the nine Kings before
me were at the time of their death seating another Guru on their throne, so shall I now not do; I have
entrusted the whole society (of the disciples) to the bosom of the timeless, divine Male. After me, you shall
everywhere mind the book of the Granth Sahib as your Guru; whatever you shall ask, it will show to you.
Whoever be my disciple, he shall consider the Granth as the form of the Guru.’
ee Having uttered these verses he closed his eyes and expired A.D. 1708.” (p. xcvi)
WELL-KNOWN BOOK
The last important writer of the ninteenth century on the history of the Punjab in English is Syed
Muhammed Latif of the Punjab Judicial Service. His well-known book History of the Punjab was published in
1891 and is still one of the best books on the subject. Some time before the death of Guru Gobind Singh,
when Sikhs asked him as to who would be Guru after him, the dying apostolic hero, according to Syed
Muhammad Latif, told them :
“T entrust my Khalsa to the bosom of the everlasting Divine Being. Whoever wishes to behold the
Guru, let him offer karah parshad worth Re 1-4 or less, and bow before the Granth and open it, and he shall
be given an interview with the Guru. The Granth shall support you under all your troubles and adversities in
this world, and be a sure guide to you hereafter. The Guru shall dwell with the society of disciples, the
Khalsa, and wherever there shall be five Sikhs gathered together, there shall the Guru be also present.”
“The Guru also gave them sundry warnings, telling them that there were impostors in the world who
would try to dissuade them from the right path, but that his disciples should be on their guard against them
and give no ear to what they say. They must have belief in One God and look on the Granth as His inspired
law ...... He then closed his eyes and began to pray, and expired in the performance of his devotions.” (p.
MACAULIFFE’S STANDARD WORK
Of the writers of the twentieth century, we would refer only to M. A. Macauliffe, whose book The
Sikh Religion, in six volumes published in 1909, was begun in the eighties of the nineteenth century and is
considered to be a standard work on the lives of the Gurus and of the bhagtas, whose hymns are incorporated
in Guru Granth Sahib. In the compilation of this work, Macauliffe was assisted by a number of well-known
Sikh scholars of his time, like Bhai Hazara Singh, Bhai Sardul Singh, Bhai Dit Singh and Bhai Kahan Singh of
Nabha, who was closely associated with it up to the last stage of its publication at Oxford in England. The
views expressed in The Sikb Religion, therefore, represent the views and beliefs not only of the orthodox
section of the Sikh community, but also of their reformist intelligentsia in the beginning of the twentieth
century. Writing about the last commandments and the death of Guru Gobind Singh, he says :
“When the Sikhs came again to take their last farewell of the Guru, they inquired who was to succeed
him. He replied, ‘I have entrusted you to the Immortal God. Ever remain under His protection, and trust to
none besides. Wherever there are five Sikhs assembled who abide by the Guru’s teachings, know that I am in
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
the midst of them. He who serveth them shall obtain the reward thereof the fulfilment of all his heart’s
desires. Read the history of your Gurus from the time of Guru Nanak. Henceforth, the Guru shall be the
Khalsa and the Khalsa the Guru. I have infused my mental and bodily spirit into the Granth Sahib and the
Khalsa.”
“After this, the Guru bathed and changed his dress. He then read the Japj and repeated an ardas ot
supplication. While doing so, he gave instructions that no clothes should be bestowed as alms in his name.
He then put on a muslin waistband, slung his bow on his shoulder and took his musket in his hand. He
opened the Granth Sahib and placing five paise and a coconut before it solemnly bowed to it as his successor.
Then uttering Waheguru ji ka Khalsa; Waheguru ji ki Fateh, he ciccumambulated the sacred volume and said, ‘O
beloved Khalsa, let him who desireth to behold me, behold the Guru Granth. Obey the Granth Sahib. It is
the visible body of the Guru. And let him who desireth to meet me, diligently search its hymns.”
USEFUL SOURCE OF INFORMATION
There is another class of evidence which is particularly relevant to our study here. It is known as the
Gur-parnalian or Genealogies of the Gurus. As they deal mainly with the parentage, births, deaths,
descendants and successors of the Gurus, they are a very useful source of information for determining the
order of succession of Guruship. Six of these Gur-parnalis by Bhai Kesar Singh, Poet Saundha, Bhai Gulab
Singh, Kavi Ram Singh, an anonymous poet and by Kavi Gulab Singh, are available, and all of them, without
exception, accept the death of Guru Gobind Singh at Nanded in 1708 as an indisputable historical fact.
GRANTH IS GURU
Under the heading Guru Granth Sahib in his well-known book the Garmat Martand, Vol. I, p. 411,
Bhai Kahan Singh refers to the holy book as S77 Guru Granth Sahib and tells us on page 415 that the use of the
word ‘Guru’ with Granth Sahib began in Samvat 1766 BK., (A.D. 1708) when Guru Gobind Singh invested
the Granth, the basic scripture of the Sikh faith, with euruship at Abchal Nagar (Nanded in the Deccan).
Bhai Kahan Singh has also answered the question of those who at times asked about the volume
which was invested with guruship. He writes on page 415 of the book mentioned above :
“We believe that it was that volume which the Tenth Guru had compiled at Damdama Sahib after
including therein the compositions of the Ninth Guru and which was lost during the great holocaust (Wadda
Ghalu-Ghara) and of which Baba Dip Singh had previously prepared several copies. But, even if no volume
was available at the time of the death of the Tenth Guru, could there be any difficulty in the investiture ?
Was Guru Tegh Bahadur present at Delhi at the time of the death of Guru Har Krishan (Who invested Guru
Tegh Bahadur with guruship) ? The Guruship could be entrusted by mental contemplation or through word
(of mouth).”
These statements and writings of Bhai Kahan Singh leave no doubt about his belief that :
@) Guru Gobind Singh did not appoint any person to succeed him as Guru, and
(it) The Tenth Guru had invested Guru Granth Sahib with guruship, and commanded the Sikhs to
accept it as their Eternal Guru.
Recently, a contemporary Narbud Singh Bhatt has been traced by Giani Garja Singh, his book Bhatt
Vabi Talauda Parganah Jind also contains an entry regarding the succession of Sri Guru Granth Sahib as future
Guru of the Sikhs ending the personal line of succession. It reads, “Guru Gobind Singh, the Tenth Master,
son of Guru Tegh Bahadur, grandson of Guru Hargobind, great-grandson of Guru Arjun, of the family of
Guru Ram Das, Surajbansi Gosal clan, Sodhi Khatri, resident of Anandpur, parganah Kahlur, now at
Nanded, on the Godavari bank in the Deccan, asked Bhai Daya Singh, on Wednesday, shukla chauth of the
month of Ka#k, 1765 BK. (October 6, 1708) to fetch Sri Granth Sahib. The Guru placed before it five pice
and a coconut and bowed his head before it. He said to the sangat, ‘It is my commandment : Own Sri Granth
ji in my place. He who so acknowledges it will obtain his reward. The Guru will rescue him. Know this as
the truth.”
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
25
BANDA SINGH BAHADUR*™
THARAM SINGH
BANDA SINGHR’S EARLY EXPLOITS
The period of eight years after the demise of Guru Gobind Singh in October 1708 is essentially
centred around the activities of Banda Singh, as far as the Sikhs are concerned. It is unfortunate that there
are hardly any authentic records of this short but lively episode in Sikh history. There are many disjointed
accounts of certain incidents in the life of Banda Singh, some written in appreciation of the man, others
written in ridicule of him. There is no complete and truly balanced account of his life and doings, written by
the early historians, but one fact emerges very clearly out of all these contradictory stories. The Sikhs of the
Punjab were waiting anxiously for the return of their Guru from the South. They then heard the sad story of
his assassination, and with Wazir Khan still waging war on them in spite of the Imperial amnesty, they were
sorely in need of a leader — one who could fill the vacuum left in their hearts by the departure of their Guru.
This vacuum was ably filled by Banda Singh Bahadur.
He was born in October 1670, to a well-to-do Rajput family living in Rajauri in Western Kashmir.
He was named Lachman Das. He had a happy boyhood, showed little love for learning, and a great deal for
riding and hunting. It is possible that his father rarely pressed him to sit down at his books. By the age of 15,
he was a good marksman with the bow and arrow.
In one of these hunting exercises, he brought down a female deer, which appeared to be pregnant.
When he slit open the carcass, he found in its womb two young calves, still alive. These little creatures kicked
about for a while and then died. This pitiful sight so upset Lachman Das, that he gave up hunting and the
eating of meat. A short while later, he gave up all worldly pursuits and became a samyasi (recluse), and left
home to become the disciple of one sadbu Janki Das. He was about 16 years old then and was re-named
Madho Das.
As other sanyasis, he wandered from house to house for his daily needs — but could get no peace of
mind. He later joined the company of another sadhu, Ram Das, wandered down into the present Maharashtra
State and reached a place called Panchbatti, near Nasik. He found this place very peaceful, and decided to
make it his home. Here, he came in contact with one famous yogi called Amar Nath. This man showed
Madho Das a book he had written on the control of man over his bodily organs (yoga) and further the
science of mesmerism and spiritualism.
When he had attained some degtee of perfection in this science, Madho Das left Panchbatti and
followed the river Godaveri downstream until he arrived at Nanded, where he set up his permanent ashram
(home of sadhus). It was here that he was then taken in hand by Guru Gobind Singh, in early 1708,
administered the amit, and named Banda Singh.
Banda Singh’s imagination was fired by the stories of the siege of Chamkaur, the cowardly execution
by Wazir Khan of the Guru’s young sons, Fateh Singh and Zorawar Singh, and of the feats of the small band
of the prodigals at Muktsar who were posthumously blessed by the Guru as the mukée (released from all
transmigration). When the Guru realised his own end drawing near, and that the task of re-uniting the Sikhs
in the Punjab must be entrusted to another man, he found Banda Singh waiting only for his command to
proceed.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
He was conferred the title Bahadur by Guru Gobind Singh, who then handed him the war-drum, the
Khalsa flag, and five arrows from the Guru’s quiver. Five Sikhs were appointed to go with him as his
Council-of-War, and Banda was ordered to consult them in all major campaigns. Their names were Binod
Singh, Kahn Singh, Baaj Singh, Daya Singh and Ran Singh. His objective was to punish all who were
responsible for the execution of the Guru’s true Sikhs, like Pir Budhu Shah, and for the protection of God-
loving men. He was further enjoined to remain a good Sikh of a clean and strong character, and never to lay
claim to the title of a Guru. Banda acquiesced to all these commands with bowed head, and asking for the
Guru’s blessing, he set out northwards on about the 4th October, 1708.
On leaving Nanded, Banda Singh headed for Delhi, which he reached in about 60 days. From Delhi,
he then started moving westward through the district of Sonipat. He now began to show the Sikhs there the
orders (bukumname) of Guru Gobind Singh, requesting all to muster under Banda’s command. The sad news
had already reached them about the manner in which the Guru had been attacked, and they were all fuming
with rage, and were anxious to punish the person they assumed to be responsible for that deed — Wazir
Khan, the Governor of Sirhind. As soon as one villager read the bukamnama, he passed the word round
throughout the village, and volunteers came pouring in to join Banda’s camp. He needed funds for his army,
and for that he devised the simple plan of robbing the rich landlords, who had oppressed the tillers of the soil
for so long, and who were easily singled out by the poor peasants. As for weapons, his men had brought
anything that had been laid up — old swords, spears, axes, poles — anything that came to hand. The Sikhs
from Bathinda district led by Fateh Singh, one of the descendants of Bhai Bhagtu, came up bringing a lot of
provisions with them. The brothers Karam Singh and Param Singh of Bhai Rupa (founded during Guru
Hargobind’s time) also brought many volunteers with them. The sons of Phool, Bhai Ram Singh and Tirlok
Singh, who had fought for Guru Gobind Singh during the siege of Anandpur, now sent men and money to
Banda Singh. Ahli Singh and Mali Singh, two brothers who served in Wazit Khan’s court, were taunted one
day by their master thus :
“T hear that a new Guru has arisen amongst you. He will soon be dragged down the streets of
Sithind, as easily as I disposed of your Guru Gobind Singh in Nanded.”
The two Sikhs promptly left Sirhind to join Banda, taking 22 more men with them and carrying
useful information about the defences of the town. Messengers from Banda had reached beyond the river
Satluj, but the Sikhs around Amritsar and Jalandhar were prevented from crossing the river by the posting of
guards by Wazir Khan at all river crossings. A good number of them, however, had reached Keeratpur and
here they recetved word from Banda that they should await orders from him before they advanced further.
Meanwhile Banda made his plans for the capture of Samana.
He had now an army of about 500 gathered at Sehri, a village in the district of Kharkhod near
Sonipat. As he neared Sonipat, the garrison commander there took fright and fled towards Delhi leaving the
town at the mercy of the Sikhs. Banda then moved further into the Punjab. As he rested near Kaithal, he
was informed about a small troop of horsemen carrying the district town’s revenue towards Delhi. He fell
upon that group and obtained sufficient funds for the pay of his army for some months. The commander of
Kaithal came out to put up a show of resistance, but was quickly overcome, and made to contribute a large
number of horses for the Sikh soldiers.
Banda’s men were thus gaining material, experience and morale, as they approached their first big
battle at Samana. This town lies about 35 miles south of Sirhind. It was the town of Jalalluddin, the
executioner of Guru Tegh Bahadur. The two executioners who built the brick walls that buried alive the
young sabibzade of Guru Gobind Singh, also belonged to this ill-fated town. On 25th November, 1709 Banda
had reached Samana at the head of a force of 3,000 horsemen and 5,000 foot-soldiers. "The commander of
Samana had his walled town well-defended, and never for a moment imagined Banda capable of carrying it.
But Banda advanced swiftly during the night and reached the gates of the town at dawn on the 26th
November. Once the gate-keepers were killed, the whole army poured into the town and there was little the
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Mughals and Sayads could do to stem the tide. The three executioners were tracked down and dispatched.
There were many wealthy Muslim families in this town, who tried saving themselves behind bolted doors.
But the soldiers of fortune who formed a part of Banda’s army gathered all the wealth that had been amassed
in this town, and Banda appointed Fateh Singh Governor of Samana leaving a small force with him to
administer the town. He marched eastward passing by Shahabad which offered his men whatever provisions
they needed. He then reached Mustafabad (near Jagadhri) whose commander put a small fight before
allowing the Sikhs access to food, horses and rifles.
Banda now turned north-east towards Sadhaura, (about 20 miles from Ambala) the home-town of
the late Pir Budhu Shah. This was the man who had gone to the aid of Guru Gobind Singh at Bhangani, with
his four sons and 700 followers. For that crime Aurangzeb had ordered the commander of Sadhaura, Usman
Khan to capture and execute the good Pir, and this news had saddened Guru Gobind Singh. He had
expressly ordered Banda Singh to mete out a just punishment for the culprit. The Sikhs fell upon Sadhaura
with intense fury, and killed almost all its males. Some of the rich Sayads took shelter in the late Pir’s
mansion hoping to escape death there, but none were spared. In their zeal some of the raiders had set fire to
a mausoleum, but this was quickly extinguished on the orders of Banda Singh. Usman Khan was killed and
his body was allowed to hang by the feet from a tree.
News of the sack of Samana and Sadhaura reached Wazir Khan, and he was now mote afraid than
ever of the danger of the Sikhs of Keeratpur joining forces with Banda Singh. To forestall that, he requested
the brothers Sher Mohammed Khan and Khizar Khan of Malerkotla to march towards Ropar to block the
Sikh advance from Keeratpur. They engaged the Sikhs somewhere between Ropar and Keeratpur and
appeared to push them back some distance. During the night, however, fresh reinforcements of Sikhs from
the Jalandhar-Amritsar areas arrived in Keeratpur, and in the fight that erupted the next morning, Khizar
Khan was hit by a bullet and fell dead. With his fall the Malerkotla force lost heart and retreated towards
Sithind. The Sikhs then thought it right to follow up their victory by advancing towards Ropar and Sirhind.
On the other side, Banda had circled around by the east of Sirhind, captured Banoor on the way, and
was awaiting the arrival of his allies at a spot between Banoor and Kharar. The two forces joined up here to
the loud hail of the Khalsa war cry accompanied by the liberal distribution of the Guru’s &rah-parshad (sweet
made from equal proportions of ghee, flour and sugar).
THE CAPTURE OF SIRHIND
Wazit Khan now knew he could not stem the tide, and he, therefore, tried his hand at treachery. He
bribed one of his Generals, a nephew of Sucha Nand, to take a thousand Hindu and Pathan soldiers over to
Banda and pretend to offer allegiance to the Sikh leader. In the heat of battle, they were to desert from there
to re-join the Mughal army, thereby dealing a blow to the morale of the Sikhs. Banda could not see through
this scheme and accepted this unusual offer of aid.
Meanwhile Wazir Khan decided to meet the Sikhs in the open, and he himself took command
ordering his heavy guns, elephants and horsemen into the line of battle, followed by his well-equipped foot-
soldiers, a force of 20,000 men all told. On the other side, there were hardly any rifles, leave alone artillery
and elephants. But they had tasted victory many times by now, and remembering the atrocity committed by
this town on Mata Gujri and the two young sabbzade (sons), they had immense fanatic zeal to make up for the
lack of proper weapons. The two armies made contact at a spot known as Chhapar Chhiri about 10 miles
from Sirhind. Banda Singh divided his forces into 3 groups sending ahead two of them, one under the
command of Fateh Singh, Karam Singh, Param Singh, and the other made up of the new arrivals who were
commanded by Baaj Singh, Binod Singh and Sham Singh. He kept a third group with him on a nearby hillock
from where he could follow the whole action, and send aid wherever needed.
With the first sound of fighting, the thousand men under the nephew of Sucha Nand fled to the
other side. Banda promptly brought his men down to take their place, and with that the Sikhs began
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
attacking with fresh heart. Casualties were heavy on both sides, but the men under Fateh Singh kept
advancing towards the heavy guns which were soon silenced. Baaj Singh and Binod Singh were also showing
their mettle, and cutting down their foe in hand to hand fighting. Sher Mohammed Khan and his brother
Khuaja Ali of Malerkotla were killed in this battle. Then Baaj Singh came face to face with Wazir Khan who
was on horseback, and who was mowing down the Sikhs with his sword. Baaj Singh would have been killed
there, had not Fateh Singh rushed up in time to bring Wazir Khan down with a shot from his rifle. With his
fall, the Mughals lost heart and scattered in all directions, leaving a rich booty of cannon and rifles in the
hands of the Sikhs.
This action took place on 22nd May 1710. Banda’s army then advanced on Sirhind, whose remaining
defenders could put up only a half-hearted resistance. On the 23rd May, Banda’s men entered Sirhind. The
Sikhs were assisted by a mob of Hindu peasantry from the surrounding villages also, whose person and
property had been outraged by the rich landlords of this town.
The Sikhs had waited for this moment for six years. They had vowed in their daily prayers to tear
this town of ill-repute down to the ground. For Sucha Nand, the Brahmin adviser in the court of Wazir
Khan, the Sikhs bore a severe hatred. This man had urged his master not to spare the young sons of the
Guru, as according to him, “the snake’s young ones deserve no mercy.” So the invaders went straight to this
man’s house, killed all its occupants, and grabbed all its treasures. As a contemporary writer puts it, “It
seemed as if Sucha Nand had amassed all his wealth merely to keep it ready for the arrival of the Sikhs.” His
empty house was then literally demolished.
The eldest son of Wazir Khan had fled to Delhi. The general slaughter was halted on the orders of
Banda Singh, when a deputation of Hindus came to him begging for mercy. The town was, therefore, saved
from being razed to the ground, as the Sikhs had vowed in their resolution passed at the Akal Takht at
Amritsar. This fate was to befall it later at the hands of Jassa Singh in the year 1763.
Banda’s immediate objective had been attained. Next came the task of setting up a new
administration. Baaj Singh was appointed the Governor of Sirhind. Fateh Singh retained his post at Samana.
Ram Singh, a brother of Baaj Singh, was made a District Officer at Thanesar. Binod Singh assisted him there.
Sithind occupied a central post in the lines of communication between Delhi and Lahore. Its location
enabled it to exercise control over all the territories between the rivers Jamuna and Satluj. Banda Singh was
now acknowledged master of this area, even by the smaller Muslim Commanders, a few of whom even chose
to be converted to Sikhism. Nazir Khan, the keeper of Records at Sirhind, was one of these to avow Sikhism.
Banda’s successes had spread terror amongst the Muslim Commanders at Jalandhar and at Lahore, where the
Sikhs were now openly raiding the countryside. They passed resolutions at Amritsar and marched upon
Batala and Kalanaur, which were easily occupied. The Commander of Lahore, Aslam Khan dared not
venture out of his fortified town in order to aid any of his Subordinate Commanders. Hearing about the
successes of their friends in the Maha districts, the Sikhs of the Doaba also sent a challenge to Shamas Khan,
the Commander of the Jalandhar Doab.
Coming back to Banda Singh’s doings, his first job was the establishment of his own headquarters at
Mukhlispur, a few miles north of Sadhaura. Being in hilly land it was easier to defend against an enemy.
There was a half-built fort already there. Banda completed it and called it Lohgarh.
Then he learnt about the burial in Malerkotla of a Sikh girl Anup Kaur, who had served in the Guru’s
household at Anandpur, and who had fallen into the hands of Sher Mohammed Khan during the crossing of
the river Sirsa. This Commander had brought the girl to Malerkotla intending to make her his mistress. But,
the brave girl had stabbed herself to death, and the Nawab had hastily buried her close to the palace
compound, afraid of adverse publicity.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Banda Singh Bahadur marched on Malerkotla, with the intention of digging up the body and giving it
a cremation as approved by Sikh rites. He remembered too well, the affection the Sikhs had for the same
Sher Mohammed Khan, who was the only one of the Muslim leaders present at the trial and condemnation of
the two sons of Guru Gobind Singh, who had raised his voice in dissent over the cruel sentence. So Banda
Singh’s orders to his men were to search for the grave without any harm to the inhabitants of Malerkotla.
The body had lain in the ground for over a year, and it took a deal of exhumation of nearby graves, before the
correct one was identified. Some Muslim historians have picked on this incident as an excuse to paint Banda
Singh in the goriest of pictures that they could imagine. But if they could see the motive behind this action,
they would have better appreciated the lofty ideals and the true character of the man.
With the cremation completed, he returned to Sirhind, to quell any dissident groups that still
remained in the regions surrounding this town. He then impressed his stamp of authority over the whole
region by minting a special coin. He remembered Guru Gobind Singh’s advice to consider himself the
caretaker and the servant of the Khalsa, and not to assume Guruship. His coin bore evidence of his great
respect for the house of Guru Nanak.
While Banda was away in Malerkotla, Baaj Singh had to take action against Ghurani, a village
occupied mainly by the Ram Rai sect. These people had abused a Sikh musician who had sung Gurbani and
had mentioned Guru Gobind Singh in his ardas. Ahli Singh was dispatched with a small force westward, and
he soon put matters right, setting up a guard post at Chawa Pail. Ahli Singh received tribute from the local
landlords and then proceeded southward through Sunam, and Mansoorpur, exacting tribute as he moved,
until he reached Kaithal. The Baloch tribe of Kaithal were proud and had refused to acknowledge the
authority of the Sikhs. Ahli Singh made a surprise attack on the town and after subduing the Muslim
defenders, he made them pay up a heavy tribute and to promise a regular payment of revenues in future. Ahli
Singh then returned to Sirhind.
As mentioned earlier, quite a number of the Muslim Chiefs had embraced Sikhism for personal
security. There were a great many Hindus especially those of the untouchable caste, who took to this faith
because of the status and equality it gave to its members. If a low-caste villager joined a Sikh band and took
baptism from its leaders, he would return to his own village to find its landlords bowing to him in utmost
respect. Banda also abolished the system of landlordism, making the tenants the direct owners of the land
they tilled, and collecting revenues direct from the tenants. This had liberated large areas between Sirhind and
Panipat from the cruel oppression of the rich landlords, and was another factor in favour of a large-scale
conversion to Sikhism. This movement had spread to the Deoband district across the river Jamuna, much to
the annoyance of Jalal Khan, the Commander of Jalalabad. He arrested any new Sikhs around his town, and
one day he threw Kapoor Singh, a Sikh preacher into prison. This incident was reported to Banda Singh,
who immediately set out actoss the Jamuna and headed for Saharanpur, the divisional headquarters for 24
smaller districts, including Deoband.
Sayad Ali Khan, the Commander of Saharanpur, was sorely afraid, and could not be persuaded by the
tich citizens of the town to take to the battlefield. He had vivid memories of the massacres at Samana and
Sithind. During the night, he collected all his valuables and fled with his family towards Delhi. As the Sikhs
approached the town, only a small force set out to offer a token resistance, and the Sikhs were soon swarming
all over the city’s rich mansions.
From there, Banda headed for Jalalabad. Nanauta, a town owned by the Sayads, came on their way
and Banda set upon that on 11th July, 1710. A sharp encounter took place here, but the Sheikhs and Sayads
were heavily out-numbered and overcome. Jalalabad lay about five miles away. It was strongly fortified by
the Pathan Commander, who had made full preparations for the attack. The fort was built on a hillock with a
small stream flowing by it. Jalal Khan sent a force under his son Dindar Ali Khan, and his nephews Jamal
Khan and Pir Khan to engage the Sikhs as they neared the fort. The fighting was fierce and losses heavy on
both sides. But the Pathans retreated after this encounter and decided to stay within their fort. The Sikhs
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
could not force an entry into the fort. They laid a siege that lasted 20 days, but to no avail. Meanwhile Banda
received urgent calls for help from the Punjab, and decided to lift the siege, much to the relief of Jalal Khan.
He re-crossed the Jamuna and reached Karnal which was easily taken. He then left Ram Singh and Binod
Singh in charge of all this territory up to Panipat and headed for Sirhind.
THE ACTION IN THE TERRITORY WEST OF THE SATLUJ
The lands between the river Beas and Satluj are known as the Doab. Those further west are broadly
described as the Majha, though here again there used to be further sub-division into the Bari Doab and the
Rachna Doab.
News of the victories of Banda Singh at Samana and Sadhaura had spread to these areas, and the
uncommitted peasantry here eagerly espoused Sikhism with the double aim of gaining self-respect and of
revolting to throw off the Mughal yoke. They had suffered heavy taxes, and persecution at the hands of the
landlords, and Banda Singh was promising lower taxes and personal ownership to all. So the Mayha peasants
stopped paying revenue to their landlords. Instead they assembled at Amritsar and passed a resolution at the
Akal Takht that the Khalsa would henceforth drive the foreigners out of the Punjab, and would try to bring
into reality the saying of Guru Gobind Singh, “Raj Karega Khalsa.”
They decided that Lahore and Qasoor (a Pathan stronghold) were too well defended against assault.
They turned their attention first to the territory along both banks of the Beas river known as the Rvarki.
These villages were easily subdued and their headmen removed from their posts. The new headman of each
village was instructed to hand all future revenues to the Sikh Commanders.
Batala, a rich trading centre, was their next target. This town was easily taken. Kalanaur, a hillside
town where the Emperor Akbar had been crowned, was captured next, and then followed the subjugation of
the inhabited area around the Kahnuwan woods. A party of Sikhs had marched as far north as Pathankot and
taken that district under their control.
Aslam Khan, the Governor of Lahore, had watched all these proceedings with a sinking heart. He
was utged by the rich merchants and the priests of Lahore to do something, but he refused to leave the town,
or to send a force out to meet the enemy, for fear of an attack on Lahore, should things go wrong. The
merchants, maulvis, and landlords, in desperation raised the Harder flag for a holy war, and called for
volunteers to gather at the Id Gah (prayer place) just outside the town gates. (Haider is the name given to the
flag after Haider Ali, the son-in-law of Prophet Mohammed).
Those who ate prepared to sacrifice themselves in a holy war or jebad are called Ghazis, and these
volunteers gathered in thousands from the countryside around Lahore. They appointed Mohammed Taqj,
Haji Sayed Ismail, and Pir Mohammed Waiz as their leaders. The Governor was at last moved to contribute
500 horsemen and 1,000 infantry under Mir Ataullah Khan and Muhib Khan, to re-inforce the Ghazis. So the
martyrs dressed in bright green and holding green flags in their hands marched by the side of the royal forces,
and this made quite a pretty sight for the inhabitants of Lahore who came out to give them a good send-off.
The Sikh force nearest to Lahore consisting of about 200 men was stationed inside a big brick house
at Bharath village, on the bank of the Ravi. It had been converted into a fortress, and it was for this that the
Ghazis headed with much cheering and the beating drums. They found the defenders well prepared, and on
the first charge, a hail of bullets and arrows knocked down a large number in the front rows. An equal
number stepped up to take their places, and they met the same fate. The attackers were too numerous to be
easily disheartened, and they continued their series of charges on to the brick walls of the fort until nightfall,
even though hundreds of dead bodies lay piled up around. The defenders, on the other hand, were safe
behind their defences, but were now feeling exhausted after a continuous action of 12 hours. They did not
have sufficient men to allow one patty to take rest.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
During the night they opened the gate and charged out along the weakest point in the enemy lines.
They thus escaped into the darkness with minimum loss in lives.
The next morning the Ghazi army, overjoyed at their victory began looting the Hindu families of
Bharath and turned back towards Lahore, abusing and robbing all the villagers that came in their way. They
then held a big celebration at the Id Gah. A few days later, the Sikhs assembled about 700 strong at Kotla
Begum, near the village Chamiari. The Ghazi force set out at once, joined this time by many bad characters
who hoped to secure some easy loot. True enough, this army robbed all the innocent villagers that came their
way and quite a few women were outraged. Their leaders were shocked over these happenings, and did their
best to punish the offenders, but the general tone of this army was far from disciplined. They came face to
face with the well prepared Sikhs at Kotla, and both armies began discharging their muskets and arrows.
These soon gave way to the sword in hand to hand fighting, and it was here that the discipline of the Sikh and
his firm conviction in the justice of his cause really told. The sky was overcast, but the steel blade flashed in
the hands of the Sikhs like lightning and the Ghaz7z bit the dust in large heaps everywhere. Towards noon,
the Government cavalry began to give way, retreated, and as if with one intent they fled the battleground.
That took the heart out of the Ghazis. They began running in all directions, and the Sikhs pursued
them a short distance. Then a dust-storm arose, reducing visibility and the victors thought it prudent to
return to collect all the weapons thrown away by the running G/azis. They then returned to their fort to rest
for the night.
This battle had taken place at about the time when Banda was marching upon Jalandhar (July 1710).
The routed Ghazis had tried to follow the trail of the retreating Government troops, and they finally
converged upon Bhilowal by night-fall the following day. Here they lay down to rest, in the open, completely
broken in spirit, and careless about all regards for their safety during the night. Unfortunately for them, the
Sikhs at Kotla Begum woke up refreshed, the morning after their victory, and decided to follow the retreating
foe. They reached Bhilowal towards midnight and immediately fell upon the unguarded Ghazis. The
Government troops sleeping within the village heard the commotion outside, but dared not come out to the
aid of their comrades. Only a few hundred G/azis outside the village escaped this slaughter. The Sikhs
captured more weapons and some horses, and left before day break. The remnants of this once proud band
of Ghazi fighters reached Lahore in tears, and no further attempts were made to raise the Haider flag at the Id
Gab.
Following the early successes of the Mayha Sikhs, those in the Doab were encouraged to try their
fortunes in war. Moreover, they were joined by a number of fighters from the Sirhind bands of Banda Singh.
So the Doaba peasants mustered an army of one to two thousand and fell upon Rahon (near Sultanpur).
Enayat Khan, the landlord of this town, had robbed many of the surrounding villages, was notorious for his
greed and lust, and had usurped the powers of the Commissioner of that district. He was quickly disposed
off and a Sikh Commander was set up in his post, to collect all future revenues from the farmers. The Sikhs
then set their sights on Sultanpur.
Sultanpur was then the military headquarters for the whole of the Jalandhar division. Shamas Khan,
the son of Mir Khan, had been appointed its Governor by Bahadur Shah in return for the services both
father and son had rendered him in his campaigns against his brothers. The Sikhs sent two of their men to
Shamas Khan with an ultimatum for submission or war. Shamas Khan was a good tactician. He received the
two messengers with all courtesy, and sent them back with a small gift of food and some ammunition, with a
promise of more supplies in a few days time. He then summoned his military chiefs, along with the maulvs
and rich merchants and obtained their promises of loyalty and speedy action to raise an army. Messengers
were sent out to the villages to recruit fighters (G/azzs) for a holy war. In this manner, he was able to muster
a force of 5,000 horsemen and over 20,000 foot-soldiers, before the Sikhs at Rahon realised what was
happening. As he began his march on them, the Sikhs sent urgent messages to Banda Singh (then at
Jalandhar), and prepared to dig themselves in at an abandoned brick kiln outside the Rahon fort. They raised
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
its walls higher with sacks of old bricks and earth. As Shamas Khan drew near, led by eager bands of Ghazss,
ill trained and armed with ineffective scythes and cudgels, the Sikhs fired volley after volley of arrows and
bullets killing or wounding the vanguard by the hundreds. Even when Ghazis came close enough for hand to
hand fighting they were no match for the Sikh swordsmen. As the Sikhs tired of this slaughter, they decided
on a rearguard action, slowly retreating into the fort. Shamas Khan decided to lay siege, as a direct assault
would be too costly. This began on 11th October, 1710.
Seeing no advantage in holding this fort against such an overwhelming force, this band of about a
thousand men waited for midnight before charging out into the darkness, and the woods nearby. Shamas
Khan was glad to be rid of them, and he returned to Sultanpur, leaving a small guard in charge of Rahon. But
the Sikhs had not gone far. They waited till the Khan reached Sultanpur, and re-occupied the fort,
compelling the residents of Rahon to pay tribute to them. Shamas Khan had no heart for a second attack on
Rahon, but had meanwhile sent a report of his action to the Emperor, Bahadur Shah.
The Sikhs next advanced upon Jalandhar, met no resistance there, collected tribute money, and
moved north towards Hoshiarpur. The District Officer here also agreed to pay his collections to the Sikh
representatives. In this manner, practically the whole of the Doab, with the exception of Sultanpur and its
neighbourhood, was under Sikh control.
Their next target was Bilaspur, the capital of Kahloor, the hill-state around Anandpur that had
marshalled all the other hill Rajas against Guru Gobind Singh, and had even repaid with treachery the Guru’s
timely aid against the Raja’s enemies. The Sikhs advanced on Bilaspur under Sardar Baghar Singh, Bajjar
Singh, Kehar Singh and others, and as was their custom, they sent the Raja an ultimatum to accept allegiance
or fight. The Raja summoned aid from other hill Rajas, and stored up enough supplies in his fort for a siege.
He had mustered about 1,500 Rajput fighters by the time the Sikhs charged. They cut down his guard of
elephants first and then broke through the main gate of the fort. They made quick work of the 1,500
defenders. Not a soul was spared; so fierce was their desire to punish this sworn enemy of their beloved
Guru.
After this action, the Sikhs had unchallenged control of all the Majha and Doaba lands with the
exception of two pockets — one at Lahore and the other at Sultanpur. Banda himself was in command of
the Mafva territories from Sirhind to Panipat, and also of some of the areas beyond the Jumuna river. For a
brief period in the history of the Punjab, the Sikhs were masters of their own land, with Banda Singh Bahadur
as their uncrowned king (May - October 1710).
THE TIDE TURNS AGAINST BANDA
Whilst Banda Singh was capturing Samana and Sirhind, Emperor Bahadur Shah was engaged in a war
in the Deccan against one of his brothers. He received news of the Sikh victories on 30th May, 1710. Asad
Khan, his Governor at Delhi had been sending frequent reports of the events around Panipat, Saharanpur,
and Sultanpur. He had planned to spend some time in Rajputana to punish the Rajas there for siding with his
brother, but the worsening situation in the Punjab compelled him to forsake those plans and to march at
once northward. He wrote to the Governors of Oudh, Moradabad and Allahabad to send their troops to
Delhi, where they were to join the forces already stationed under Asad Khan, who was ordered to despatch
his army against the Sikhs. He himself bypassed Delhi and reached Sonipat on 22nd October. He had an
advance force under his trusted General Feroze Khan, and as this force neared Panipat they found an army
under Bazid Khan of Qasoor already camped there, but afraid to proceed further on their own. Bazid Khan
had been appointed Governor of Jammu when Bahadur Shah had defeated one of his own brothers in the
Punjab some time back, but this General had never been able to reach his province from Delhi, because of
the Sikhs.
This combined force under Bazid Khan and Feroze Khan now marched into the territory controlled
by Sardars Ram Singh and Binod Singh. The latter had only a token force under their command. In fact the
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
whole Sikh army was scattered over distant ateas, and each unit itself was no match against the advancing
Mughal army. The two Sikh Generals were, however, determined to take the most out of the enemy. They
retreated towards Thanesar, and concealed themselves in the woods on both sides of the main road near the
village of Amingarh.
Muhabat Khan, the son of the Minister Munim Khan, led the vanguard. As they came within range
they received a sudden hail of arrows and bullets, were too shaken to recover, and retreated in complete rout.
Then Feroze Khan brought up his horsemen. As the cavalry were hampered by the thick growth of trees, he
ordered his foot-soldiers forward and the vastly superior numbers of Mughals pushed the Sikhs back. They
lost a large number in this action but succeeded in sending the dreaded Sikhs away into the deep jungle. The
Sikhs had lost 300 men in this action. The heads of the dead were cut off and sent in a cart as trophies to the
Emperor. Feroze Khan was rewarded with a large sum in cash and the post of the Commissioner of Sirhind.
This took place at the end of October 1710.
This Sikh force retreated through Thanesar to Shahabad with Feroze Khan in pursuit. Meanwhile,
the army under Bazid Khan advanced towards Sirhind. Here he was joined by his nephew Shamas Khan who
had now ventured out of Sultanpur. Baaj Singh, the Commander of Sirhind, happened to be away on some
business, and his two brothers, Sham Singh and Sukha Singh, came out to offer a spirited resistance, but were
pushed back into the fort. Sukha Singh was killed in this action which took place about the 20th November.
Bahadur Shah now ordered another famous General Mohammed Amin Khan to lay siege to Sirhind on 27th
November. But before he could reach Sirhind, the fort had already fallen to the combined armies of Bazid
Khan and Shamas Khan. The Sikhs had seen the impossibility of holding out against such enormous odds,
and after a couple of days fighting, they had vacated it, during the night and retreated to Lohgarh.
The Emperor had meanwhile reached Sadhaura, and on 4th December, 1710 he received a number
of Sikh heads as trophies sent by Shamas Khan from Sirhind. At about the same time he received a report
from the jealous Mohammed Amin Khan, which said that Shamas Khan had collected a very large force
under his command, and was showing signs of mutiny against the Emperor. So instead of rewarding the
energetic Shamas Khan, the Emperor relieved him of his Command at Sultanpur, and appointed in his place,
the Deputy Commander Isa Khan who had been left in charge there. Isa Khan had been a notorious bandit
along the highways of the Doab, and had come to Sultanpur only when the Sikhs took charge of the
countryside. With his official appointment as Commander, and with the return of the defeated Sikhs from
Samana and Sirhind, this man began a reign of terror in the Doab, ordering the execution of all Sikhs on sight.
After a brief resistance, the Sikhs had retreated from Sadhaura, and joined the main party about 7
miles away at the fort of Lohgarh. The forces under Bahadur Shah were too powerful for the scattered
groups of Sikhs. The Emperor’s son Jahandar Shah commanded 30,000 cavalry, Muhabat Khan commanded
7,000 cavalry and Feroze Khan, Rustum Dil Khan and other Generals had over 20,000 cavalry and at least
30,000 foot-soldiers.
At their best of times, the Sikhs could have had 10,000 cavalry, and about twice as many foot-
soldiers. At this particular moment Banda Singh had with him no more than 5,000 fighters all told, at
Lohgarh. He had failed to store much food for a long siege, but he had made the best use of the location of
the fort. It was situated on a hillock surrounded by smaller mounds, with numerous ravines running between
them, some of which were now in flood. To reach the fort, the Mughal troops had to pass by a number of
these mounds, which had Sikh soldiers perched atop of them, ready to rain down arrows and bullets into the
enemy below.
What with such treacherous terrain, the rain and winter cold, and the stories then going round their
camp about the supernatural powers of Banda Singh, and his ability to transform himself into the shape of
vatious beasts, the Mughal Generals were sorely afraid to take the lead in the attack. The Emperor had
actually forbidden his Generals making a frontal attack. He had given his son Prince Rafi-ul-Shah the overall
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
command. His minister Munim Khan, Generals Feroze Khan, Rustum-Dil Khan, Hamid-ud-Din Khan, and
two Rajput Rajas were to take orders from the Prince.
Feroze Khan and Rustum Dil Khan were ordered to take up positions a little closer to the fort. On
4th December, they advanced a mile or so and were set upon by the Sikhs entrenched atop the mounds. The
Mughals were losing a large number of men, and more reinforcements under Munim Khan and his son
Muhabat Khan arrived and the Sikhs were dislodged from the mounds and pushed back into the main fort.
Rustum Dil Khan then advanced cautiously for another half a mile until he reached the bank of the Som
rivulet near the fort. He encamped there for the night. The Emperor too brought his main army up to this
bank by the 9th December, and he had his first look at the fort from there.
The next day Prince Rafi-ul-Shan took his 30,000 troops to the foot of the fort on the left. Munim
Khan advanced with his two sons and with General Hamid-ud-Din’d forces towards the right of the fort.
Munim Khan then asked the Emperot’s permission to move closer to probe the defences on the right. As he
neared the main hillock, his army received a hail of bullets and arrows from the mounds still in the way, and it
took the Mughals the whole day to reach the walls of Lohgarh. It had cost them heavily to reach there, and
the Emperor was watching this advance from the other flank, still undecided whether he should give his
troops the order for the assault. Towards nightfall Munim Khan had ordered a slight withdrawal to rest for
the final assault the next day.
Inside the fort, Banda’s men had run short of food and ammunition. All roads to the fort had been
blocked by the enemy for nearly a month now. They knew they could not hold out any longer against such
an enormous force, and so they prepared to vacate the fort. In the middle of the night they charged out
through the weakest point in the enemy circle, and escaped into the hills of Nahan behind them. So when the
forces of Munim Khan stormed the fort the next morning and forced an entry into the main gate, they were
confronted by only a dozen or so wounded Sikhs led by one Gulab Singh who had donned Banda’s robes,
with the intention of playing a fatal prank on the invaders. He had thought nothing of offering himself in
place of his master, so that the Sikhs could have the last laugh over Bahadur Shah. The fort had fallen on
11th December, 1710.
Munim Khan, as expected, was overjoyed to capture these men alive and to lead his prisoners in
procession, with the beat of drums, to the royal camp. Over there someone had whispered to the Emperor
that the bird had flown away. The Emperor’s command to Munim Khan was brief and incisive. He was told
to keep out of his sight until he had captured Banda Singh. The poor minister was deeply hurt, and his health
declined rapidly from that day. He died two months later, while the royal army was marching across the Doab
towards Lahore.
Orders were sent immediately to the Rajas of Nahan and of Srinagar to arrest the fugitive Banda
Singh. Hamid Khan was also sent to Nahan to arrest the Raja if he could not produce Banda Singh. This
man brought back Bhoop Prakash the son of the Raja, as prisoner, and this boy was sent along with Gulab
Singh to be locked into prison at Delhi. The Emperor then began his leisurely march actoss the Doab
stopping at Bhadoli, Ropar, Hoshiarpur, Kalanaur, and Chamiari until he reached Lahore in April, 1711.
Banda Singh had to separate from his Generals during their escape from Lohgarh. He reached
Keeratpur and Anandput in two days, and as if these towns had infused the Guru’s spirit and a new life into
him, he began writing letters to various towns in the Doaba and the Majha regions asking the Sikhs there to
collect whatever weapons they could and join him at Keeratpur. One of these letters dated 12th December,
1710 is reproduced in its original form by Dr Ganda Singh in his book, Banda Singh Bahadur. The stamp of
office that he had used when he began his administration of the Punjab from Lohgarh, is used still in this
letter, and is indicative of the humility of the man. The words are translated as follows :
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
“The iron kettle, the sword, and the victory are all under the gracious patronage of Guru Nanak
Guru Gobind Singh.”
The letter itself gives an insight into the sterling character of this brave man. It runs as follows :
“The one Lord of Creation, victory to a glimpse of You.
It is the wish of the true Guru Gobind that the entire assembly of Jaunpur shall be saved. You are
the Khalsa (warriors) of the Almighty. On reading this, take up five weapons and come to join me. Adhere
to the precepts of the Khalsa. Refrain from the use of bhang (a narcotic), tobacco, opium, the brew from
poppy pods, or liquor. Do not eat meat, fish, or onion. Do not commit theft or adultery. We have tried to
spread the rule of the truth and love on this earth. My orders to all are to adhere to the precepts of the
Khalsa to earn the Guru’s protection.”
His injunction against the consumption of meat sprang from the hunting mishap he had in his youth,
and the subsequent compunction he felt for meat for the rest of his life. The Sikhs had not lost heart over
the defeats at Sirhind, and they answered this call from Banda with alacrity. He gathered a few hundred men
at Keeratpur, and then moved on towards Pathankot to gather more forces before challenging the Emperor
again.
Bazid Khan had matched into the Punjab along with the Emperor’s forces. He and his nephew
Shamas Khan had participated in the capture of Sirhind, but Shamas Khan had been dismissed from his post
at Sultanpur, as a result of court intrigues, and Bazid Khan had asked for the Emperor’s permission to
proceed to Jammu, the post that had been assigned to him almost two years back. Bazid Khan was joined by
his discomfited nephew Shamas Khan, and together these two men neared Rajpur at about the time that
Banda was collecting his Sikhs around Pathankot. Uncle and nephew were out in the woods near Brahampur
one day, when they learnt that a party of Sikhs was in the neighbourhood. They had about 900 horsemen
with them, a strong enough force to challenge the Sikh party. So they followed the trail of the fugitives until
they saw them a short distance away. Shamas Khan immediately ordered his men to charge, without waiting
for his uncle’s advice. Strangely enough the Sikh horsemen took to flight. This encouraged Shamas Khan to
give chase, and he had followed the retreating Sikhs for a mile or so, when suddenly he saw them turn round
in good formation, and with swords drawn ready for battle. His men were too surprised to give much fight,
and were quickly cut down. Baaj Singh was leading his men in the attack, and he soon came up against
Shamas Khan, who tried to pierce him with a lance thrust. Baaj Singh moved aside and before the Khan
could recover, he slashed him across the body with his sword cutting him into two.
The forces of Bazid Khan had meanwhile come up to help his nephew, and when he saw the boy
fall, he rushed up to attack Baaj Singh. Both men parried each other’s blows for a while, until Fateh Singh
came up from one side and wounded Bazid Khan so severely that he fell off his horse. The Pathans now
concentrated only on charging for the bodies of their fallen Generals, which they managed to carry away to
Rajpur. Bazid Khan died two days later, and both bodies were sent for burial to their ancestral town, Qasoor.
This battle fought in March 1711, gave great heart to Banda’s men. They took complete charge of the
territory around Kalanaur, Rajpur and Pathankot.
When news of this defeat reached the Emperor, in April, he despatched 5,000 men under Hamid
Khan. Then in May, he sent Rustum Dil Khan and Mohammed Amin Khan with 10,000 more men. By the
time the last two Generals arrived in Rajpur, Banda’s forces had crossed the river Ravi and entered the Rachna
Doab. He plundered the district of Jammu. But the Mughal forces caught up with him near Parol and
Kathooha, and finding himself encircled on three sides by the enemy, with the hills of Jammu behind him on
the fourth side, Banda decided to charge through the sector guarded by Rustum Dil Khan. This escape so
enraged Rustam Dil that he fell upon the poor peasantry around Kathooha and plundered the whole
countryside.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Mohammed Amin Khan sent a report of this escape to the Emperor putting the full blame for it on
Rustum Dil Khan’s head. The Emperor summoned Rustum to Lahore and clapped him behind prison bars.
He was freed only 4 months later. Amin Khan meanwhile continued chasing Banda Singh all over western
Punjab. The Emperor found the city of Lahore in great turmoil. The officers of Aslam Khan and the maulvis
of the city were oppressing all Hindus who gave aid or shelter to Sikhs. With the arrival of the Emperor the
order went out that all Hindus should crop their heads and shave their beards, otherwise they were to be
executed. Towards the end of January, 1712, the Emperor began losing his health and his sanity. Towards
the end of February, he was ordering the killing of all dogs and donkeys in the city. He died on the night of
the 26th February.
The struggle for the throne of Delhi between the four sons of Bahadur Shah had begun in January
1712 with the Generals siding one or the other of the brothers. By March 1712, Rafi-ul-Shah, Azim Shah
and Jahan Shah had been killed, along with some Generals and the eldest brother Jahandar Shah had
ascended the throne. Mohammed Amin Khan had given up the pursuit of Banda Singh and returned to
Lahore to side Jahandar Shah. Rustum Dil Khan, Mukhlis Khan, Muhabat Khan, Khan Zaman, and many
more Generals were either executed or imprisoned. In April 1712 Zabardast Khan was appointed Governor
of Lahore, and the new Emperor left for Delhi.
While this internecine war was raging at Lahore, Banda Singh was consolidating his position in the
hills of Jammu. He travelled to and fro between Jammu and the states of Mandi and Chamba. These hill
Rajas had been won over to the Sikh cause mainly through Banda’s personality and his reputation for blessing
his admirers with wealth and offspring. At this time, Banda Singh was pressed to take in marriage the
daughter of the Raja of Chamba. By this marriage, a son named Ajai Singh was born. At about the time that
Jahandar Shah left for Delhi, Banda had reached Sadhaura, and occupied it after a brief fight. Lohgarh was
once again made the capital of the Sikh state in May 1712.
On reaching Delhi, Jahandar Shah despatched Mohammed Amin Khan to the aid of Zain Khan the
Govenor of Sirhind, who was trying to recapture Sadhaura. These two armies tried to storm the fort first, but
failing that they surrounded it and bided their time. The Sikhs would often venture out at night, to raid one
side, collect as much supplies of food as they could, and return as swiftly as they had come. Sometimes
Banda would send fresh men and weapons from Lohgarh, and this would add to the frustration of Zain
Khan. The siege lasted till December 1712, and then Amin Khan was called back to Delhi to help the
Emperor in another emergency.
During the upheaval at Lahore, practically all the blood relatives of Jahandar Shah had been
liquidated. Farukh Syar, the son of Azim Shah, happened to be a Commander over the eastern area at that
moment, and so escaped the slaughter. This man now enlisted the aid of the Sayad brothers, Hussain Ali and
Abdulla, who had garrisons at Allahabad and Patna, and this army marched towards Delhi. Jahandar Shah
was joined by Mohammed Amin Khan and moved out to meet the rebels at Agra. He was killed in this battle
on 11th February, 1713, and Farukh Syar ascended the throne. He immediately removed Zabardast Khan
and appointed Abdus Samad Khan as Governor of Lahore, with orders for the suppression of the Sikhs at
Sadhaura. One of the Sayad brothers became the Chief Minister and the other the Commander-in-chief at
Delhi. Zakaria Khan, the son of Abdus Samad, was appointed Governor of Jammu.
With the arrival of Abdus Samad and his son at the head of a large army at Sadhaura, the Sikhs were
hard pressed for fresh rations, and after holding out a couple of months they vacated Sadhaura in the early
part of October 1713. They joined Banda Singh at Lohgarh, which was also vacated after a few days with the
Sikhs disappearing into the hills behind. Zakaria Khan was sent to Delhi to inform the Emperor about this
and to offer him the heads of Sikhs killed in the fighting. Abdus Samad then proceeded to consolidate his
position at Lahore.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Banda Singh had now reached his old haven in Jammu, known later as Dehra Baba Banda Singh. It
is a place on the bank of the river Chenab, about 28 miles from Jammu town, and well concealed in the
hillside. Here he stayed in relative peace till February 1715, receiving news of the happenings in the Punjab.
Perhaps he was awaiting a suitable moment to mount the next offensive.
BANDA SINGR’S LAST BATTLE
With the disintegration of Banda’s forces after his evacuation of Sadhaura and Lohgarh, the garrison
Commanders of the smaller towns had begun a reign of suppression of the Sikhs all over the countryside.
Abdus Samad Khan had ordered their execution on sight. Even the Hindus who were suspected of aiding
them were robbed and beaten up. Some prominent Sikhs in Kahnuwan had been forced to fight back, and in
March 1714, they had mustered under Sardar Jagat Singh and attacked the Pathans of Kahnuwan, burning
and looting their rich mansions. But this was only an isolated case of organised resistance.
By February 1715, Banda Singh had got his forces together again near Jammu, and came down upon
Kalanaur, the rich holiday resort of Mughal Emperors. He was given a fight by the Commander Sohrab
Khan and his Khatri employees, but these defenders wilted before the furious onslaught of Banda’s
horsemen, and quickly left the town at the mercy of the Sikhs.
After plundering Kalanaur and resting the night at Achal, Banda then advanced upon Batala, a very
rich trading centre, occupied by Sayads, Qazis, and other rich noblemen. Sheikh Mohammed Daim, the
Commander, put up a spirited fight, but was overcome and killed after a short engagement. This town was
partly burnt down, and those who could, escaped to Lahore or into the hills.
Farukh Syar heard about these disorders, and on 20th March, 1715 sent orders to Kamar Din Khan
(son of Mohammed Amin Khan), Muzaffar Khan and some Hindu Rajas to take their forces to Lahore to
join the army of Abdus Samad Khan in hunting down Banda Singh. The Commanders of Gujrat,
Aurangabad, Kalanaur, and a few more also brought their forces up to join in the hunt.
Banda had some information about these preparations, and ordered his men to build a mud-walled
fort at Kot Mirza Jan, a village midway between Batala and Kalanaur. He was still busy building this wall
when Samad Khan’s army appeared in sight and began to attack. Banda Singh ordered the charge, and this
was so ferocious, that the imperial troops began to lose their foot-hold. The royal Commanders had to shout
themselves hoarse to give their men courage and to urge them to counter-attack. The tide gradually turned
against the Sikhs who were after all heavily outnumbered. (Mohammed Qasim, the author of the Ibratnama,
who was present in this action, puts the Mughal forces at 24,000). The 2,000 to 3,000 Sikhs began to retreat
holding the enemy at bay at the same time. In this manner, they reached the large mansion of Duni Chand in
the village of Gurdas Nangal. This mansion had a low brick wall round it, and it also had a ditch further
outside. Banda spent the night digging the ditch deeper, and then turning water into it from a stream flowing
nearby. That made the crossing extremely muddy and well-nigh impossible for men on horseback. (This
mansion is nothing but a mound of earth and bricks now, and is a mile outside the present village of Gurdas
Nangal, which is 4 miles west of Gurdaspur).
The royal army had brought small cannon along, with which they could bombard the wall, but Banda
spent the next two days and nights raising its height with the help of mud and stone. Abdus Samad Khan
dared not try a crossing anywhere, because of the deadly fire he received from the well-manned walls. Banda,
on the other hand, had to send out parties of horsemen for provisions. Even the grass for their horses had to
be collected from the growth outside the fortress, and it is difficult to believe the daring displayed by those
Sikhs. Lest the reader should think this story an exaggeration, here is a translation from the [bratnama of
Mohammed Qasim :
“The deeds of reckless bravery of the accursed Sikhs were astounding. At least twice each day parties
of 40 to 50 of those infidels would emerge from their fortress, to cut grass for their animals. When
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
challenged by our men this group would discharge their arrows and bullets and then cut their way so quickly
through our soldiers, that within a few minutes they would disappear from sight. These raids were spreading
terror throughout our camp.”
Quite apart from the daring exploits of the ordinary Sikh soldier, there were strong rumours in the
Mughal camps that Banda Singh had magical powers, and could transform himself into many shapes to
escape captivity. Most of the Mughal Commanders were afraid of a face to face encounter with Banda, and
were constantly pushing their Oagis and Mu/as to the front to offer prayers to counter the spells of the
enemy. Abdus Samad Khan openly prayed that Banda escaped from there, so that the whole business could
be disposed off on any excuse. Only fresh orders from the Emperor to capture Banda dead or alive kept him
at his task. He was taking new measures everyday to tighten the siege, to starve the defenders to submission.
Kamar-ud-Din’s forces were holding one half of the circle and his own forces were on the other half.
This siege dragged on for eight months. Towards the end, an unfortunate dispute arose between
Banda Singh and one of his most trusted advisers Baba Binod Singh. This man along with Baaj Singh and
three others made up the war council that Banda was supposed to consult in any difficult situation. Binod
Singh advised the evacuation of the fortress, but for some reasons of his own, Banda wished to fight it out
there. Binod Singh was senior in age, and when this difference of views flared up into an open quarrel, Banda
agreed to let Baba Binod Singh take his men out of the fortress. Binod Singh and his supporters then
charged out of the fortress and escaped.
Towards the end of November 1715, the remaining defenders were running out of ammunition and
food. They were trying to exist on boiled leaves and the bark of trees, and were gradually reduced to mere
skeletons. Then on 17th December, 1715, Abdus Samad shouted across the separating moat, that he would
not allow any killing by his men, if Banda opened the gate to the fortress. When Banda ordered the gate be
opened, the Mughals rushed in to spear or stab as many as three hundred of the half-dead and helpless
defenders. About 200 were captured alive and handcuffed in twos. Banda Singh had chains round his ankles
and his wrists, and was then locked in an iron cage. The Mughals were still afraid that he might escape and so
they placed a guard on each side of the cage with swords drawn and the cage was placed aloft an elephant,
which led the procession, which paraded through Lahore, before proceeding towards Delhi. Zakaria Khan,
the son of the Lahore Governor, then took charge, and in order to give the Emperor a bigger present, he
otdered his men to lop off more heads of Sikhs that they caught on the way, and he loaded them on to the
carts that carried the 300 from Gurdas Nangal.
On 26th February, 1716, this procession neared Delhi, and Farukh Siyar ordered his Minister
Mohammed Amin Khan to go out to receive them and to prepare them for a suitable display in the town.
On the 29th February, the citizens of Delhi had lined the streets in full force, to get a good sight of the show.
First marched 2,000 soldiers each holding a Sikh head impaled on his upright spear (so many extra had been
collected on the way). Next followed Banda Singh’s elephant. A gold-laced red turban was placed on his
head, and to add further mockery to his plight, a bright printed scarlet shirt was slipped on his body. Then
came 740 prisoners (500 had been collected on the way). These men were chained in pairs and thrown across
the backs of camels. Their faces were blackened, and pointed sheepskin or paper caps were clapped on their
heads. Behind this line came the Mughal Commanders, Mohammed Amin Khan, his son Kamar-ud-Din
Khan, and his son-in-law Zakaria Khan. Their army men lined both sides of the streets.
However humiliating their plight, there were no signs of dejection or remorse on the faces of these
Sikhs. In the words of Mohammed Harisi, author of the [bratnama, who was on the spot that day : “The
crowds were pressing forward to get a better view. Many were enjoying the sight and taking hillarious jibes at
them. But nothing changed the air of calm and resignation on the faces of those Sikhs. There were no signs
of bitterness or dejection anywhere. They appeared to be happy with their lot, and were actually joined in
groups singing their Guru’s hymns. If anyone remarked that they were being punished for their sins, their
retort was : ‘No, it is all according to God’s Will ?””
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
When we see the list of weapons captured from them at Gurdas Nangal we are really amazed at what
they could do with so little. This is the list as supplied by Kanwar, the author of the Tazkrah :
1,000 swords, 217 small swords, 114 daggers, 278 shields, 173 bows, and 180 rifles. In spite of this
scanty material they could have continued defying the Mughal might a long long time, if only their supplies of
food had not run out.
The procession finally entered the famous Red Fort, where Farukh Siyar passed the sentence of
death by public execution on all of them. Only those who were prepared to avow Islam could be pardoned.
All were locked into cells, and on 5th March, 1716 the executions began. Parties of 100 were led out of
prison each day to the open square in front of the Chabuttra Jail. As the executioner called out for one man
to come forward, the latter shouted his greeting : “The Khalsa belongs to God, and victory is also His”, and
lowered his head for the sword to strike. The head rolled away, and before the executioner could call out, the
next prisoner had already stepped forward. Some were actually trying to beat the queue to receive what they
termed their salvation as quickly as possible. Often had they heard Gurbani describe Death as the Bride, and
meeting it as a marriage. Khafi Khan who was an eye-witness at this show, makes special mention of the
astonishing cheerfulness, eagerness and sheer bravado displayed by those martyrs. All the historians of that
period were amazed at the way those captives appeared to be laughing in the face of death. Gulam Hussain
writes :
“The most noticeable feature about them was their sheer unconcern about their fate. They were
vying with each other to be in front, and some were even trading jokes with the executioner.”
Khafi Khan illustrates the resolute will and complete devotion to their cause displayed by those Sikhs
by telling us about one young prisoner who was about to be called up from the line. This boy had been newly
married and had been hauled in by Zakaria Khan’s soldiers on the way, only to swell the number of captives
for the pleasure of Farukh Styar. He was the only son of his widowed mother, who had hurried to plead her
case before the Emperor. She said that her son had been beguiled into joining the Sikh bands, but was not a
Sikh at heart. On that ground, the Emperor wrote out the order of pardon for the boy, and the mother had
hurried with that note and handed it to the officer-in-charge of the executions. The officer read out the
pardon and the youth shouted out, “My mother has lied. I am a Sikh of my Guru in body and soul. Do not
separate me from my departed friends. Please hurry so that I can join them now.”
Saying that he left the guards dumbfounded and rushed away to the front of the queue again. He
lowered his head before the executioner and refused to budge until the sword had descended and cut him
into two.
That gory scene was enacted for seven days until all the ordinary captives had been disposed off.
According to Mohammed Harisi, their bodies were loaded on wagons and taken out of town to be thrown to
the vultures. The heads were hung up on trees or on poles near the market-place to be a lesson to all rebels.
Not one from the 700 odd men had asked for pardon.
The jailors next turned their attention to the 20 odd sardars, including Baaj Singh, Fateh Singh, Ahli
Singh and Gulab Singh (of Lohgarh fame). These men were tortured to the extreme and were asked to
divulge the place where they had buried all the treasures that had been looted from Sirhind, Batala and other
towns during their better days. These cruelties are described vividly in a letter dated March 1716 written by
two representatives of the East India Company at Delhi — John Surman and Edward Stephenson.
Failing to get any clues after three months, they prepared to put an end to their lives on 19th June,
1716. Banda’s cage was again hoisted on top of an elephant, and he was dressed in mock attite of an
emperor, with a colourful red pointed turban on his head. His 4 year old son Ajai Singh was placed in his lap.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
The twenty odd sardars marched behind the elephant and this special procession then passed through the
streets of Delhi, and headed for the Kutub-ud-Din mausoleum of Bahadur Shah, near the present Kutab
Minar. On reaching that graveyard, the captives were again offered a choice of two alternatives : conversion
to Islam or death. Needless to say all chose death. The Sikh sardars were subjected to tortures before being
executed. Their heads were then impaled on spears and arranged in a circle round Banda who was now
squatting on the ground. There were hundreds of spectators standing around watching this scene.
Banda Singh was then given a short sword and ordered to kill his own son Ajai Singh. As he sat
unperturbed, the executioner moved forward and plunged his sword into the little child cutting the body into
two. Then pieces of flesh were cut from the body and thrown in Banda’s face. His liver was removed and
thrust into Banda Singh’s mouth. The father sat through all this without any signs of emotion. His powers
of endurance were to be tested still further. But before that, Mohammed Amin Khan, who was standing near
spoke as follows : “From your manner so far you appear to be a man of virtue, who believes in God, and in
doing good deeds. You are also very intelligent. Can you tell me why you are having to suffer all this here °”
Banda’s reply was, “When the tyrants oppress their subjects to the limit, then God sends men like me
on this earth to mete out punishment to them. But being human, we sometimes overstep the laws of justice,
and for that we are made to pay whilst we are still here. God is not being unjust to me in any way.”
The executioner then stepped forward and thrust the point of his dagger into Banda’s right eye,
pulling out the eyeball. He then pulled out the other eyeball. Banda sat through all this as still as a rock. His
face gave no twitch of pain.
The cruel devil then took his sword and slashed off Banda’s left foot, then both his arms. But
Banda’s features were still calm as if he was at peace with his Creator. Finally they tore off his flesh with red-
hot pincers, and there being nothing else left in their book of tortures, they cut his body up into a hundred
pieces, and were satisfied. (These details of the torture are given in full, by the following writers : Mohammed
Harisi, Khafi Khan, Thornton, Elphinstone, Daneshwar and others).
BANDA SINGH’S CHARACTER AND HIS ACHTEVEMENTS
With Banda’s death in June 1716, we close a short but hectic chapter in Sikh history, a chapter that
evolves entirely around the achievements of this man.
It is necessary now to correct some of the opinions given on his character by the Muslim historians
of those days. They are all agreed on his good judgement and great bravery in battle, but nearly all the
Muslim writers have painted him in gory colours as a merciless animal in victory. They can be excused for
holding this view because to them, as to the Muslims of Lahore, every battle fought by the Sikhs was a
religious wat. They failed to appreciate the philosophy taught and practised by Guru Gobind Singh :
Hindu Turuk Kou, Rafze, Emam Shaffi,
manas ki jaat sabhai ekai pebchaanbo.
which emphatically states “men may call themselves Hindus, Muslims, Emams and Shaffies, but I see
them all belonging to one race — mankind.”
Guru Gobind Singh had given Banda specific orders to punish those who had persecuted good saints
like Pir Budhu Shah. He had not mentioned any revenge on those who had executed his own young boys at
Sithind. He had expected Bahadur Shah to fulfil his promise to punish those who had committed atrocities
on good men, but had parted company from the Emperor completely disappointed. Banda Singh was then
taught to bring to reality the Guru’s own dream :
Dharam Chalawan, sant ubaaran
Dust sabhon ko mool upaaran.
which simply says : “To propagate justice, to uplift the righteous, and to uproot their oppressors.”
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
That Banda Singh had kept this injunction in mind throughout his campaign, is apparent from the
specimen copy of the letters (4ukumnama) he wrote to the Sikhs, in which he mentions his ambition to
establish “the rule of truth and love on this earth.”
One can understand the error in judgement made by all these Muslim writers, when one recalls the
gross misjudgements committed by their Emperors on such peace loving saints as Guru Arjun Dev and Guru
Tegh Bahadur. When writers are blinded by the cry of a religious war (had), they can never discern between
truth and falsehood. Guru Gobind Singh never waged a war on any religion. In fact, he was always on the
defensive. If his wars had any religious tint in them, then he could never have had leaders like Budhu Shah
and Said Beg fighting for him. Indeed no writer can ever pass wrong judgement on any of the Sikh Gurus if
he has only once read a few lines of their poetical compositions and grasped their message to all mankind.
Unfortunately for them, no Muslim historian cared to look into the writings of Guru Gobind Singh. And so,
when it came to judging Banda Singh, they were looking at him from the viewpoint of the Muslim inhabitants
of Lahore, who had raised the Haderi flag and called for a jebad.
To understand all this, we must recall that Banda’s army was made up of three different types of
men. Firstly, there were the true Sikhs of Guru Gobind Singh who had given up home and hearth for his
sake, and who were anxiously awaiting his return from the Deccan. These men threw in their lot with Banda
as soon as he read out the Guru’s /ukumnana to them. They were true Sikhs who fought only for the defence
of the weak and the oppressed. The accumulation of wealth was not part of their creed. Secondly, there
were those who were in the pay of the Chiefs of Phool Mehraj, whose elders had been blessed with rich states
of their own during the days of Guru Har Rai. These men needed no share in the loot as their families were
already provided for by their Chiefs. The third category consisted of the peasantry recruited from around the
countryside, who had been exploited by their landlords, and who now found an opportunity to recover their
losses. In this group also were some from the towns whose families had been outraged by the Mughal
officers. So wherever there was looting and unnecessary killing, it was committed by such men who had once
been looted themselves or whose families had been raped. A man who writes orders to his Sikhs to “adhere
to the precepts of the Khalsa. Refrain from the use of ...... Do not commit theft or adultery”, would be the
last petson to allow them freedom to loot the population.
Banda himself never enjoyed killing. His orders were strict against any killing of women and
children. At Sirhind the killing had been more severe than usual, mainly because of the pent-up wrath of the
Sikhs over the wanton slaying of Baba Fateh Singh and Baba Zorawar Singh. But even here Banda gives us
an indication of his true character by ordering a halt to all killing, when a deputation of Hindus pleaded for
mercy. This was done in spite of the resolution which had been passed by the Sikhs at Amritsar to have
Sithind razed to the ground. No Muslim historian of those days cates to mention such incidents. Nor do
they mention the fact that during the short period of his reign over Sirhind, all Muslim employees were given
time off to say their noon prayers. Nor were any mosques destroyed by his men. Not a soul in Malerkotla
suffered any harm when Banda Singh went there to search for the grave of Anup Kaur.
The truth is that all the historians of that period were either employees of the Emperor or were
writing from a religious viewpoint. In his Hiéstory of the Punjab, Mr. Thornton makes a cute remark, when he
says, “One cannot believe everything said by these Muslim writers.”
Mills also sees the point when he says that those writers had to make Banda responsible for all the
atrocities committed on their co-religionists in order to arouse their emotions for a religious wat.
All that has been said above applies also to the history written by Mohammed Latif. His assessment
of Banda Singh is ludicrous to the extreme, and can be dismissed with the statement that his views suffer
from the additional defect of being second-hand, since he is of a much later period (late 19th century).
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
To appreciate Banda’s nature, one has to remember how he turned away from all killing when his
arrow struck down a mother deer and her young kids. He shunned meat from that day. How could a man of
such sensitivity be ever portrayed as a man who killed with cruelty; that he seemed to relish shedding blood ?
And, yet this is what Latif and the rest have said of Banda.
The charge levelled against him, that his was a communal war of Sikhs against Muslims, is refuted by
the following report submitted to Emperor Bahadur Shah by one of his courtiers on 28th April, 1711.
“The wretched disciple of Nanak has his camp in the town of Kalanaur up to 26th April, 1711.
During this period, he has promised and proclaimed, ‘I do not oppose the Muslims.’ Accordingly, for any
Muslim who approaches him, he fixes a daily wage, and looks after him. He has permitted them to read
Kbutba and Namaz, with the result that 5,000 Muslims are in his service. They are free to shout their call and
say their prayers in the army of the wretched (Sikhs).”
— Akhbar-i-Darbar-t-Mualla
There is no doubt about Banda’s extraordinary bravery when he attacked. This great strength had
been instilled into him from the awrit he received from Guru Gobind Singh. But his ferocity in battle was
channelled only towards one goal — the destruction of tyranny. This bravery in battle was well controlled.
He knew exactly when the odds against victory were too heavy, and on such occasions, he chose to retreat.
The Mughal General Amin Khan himself bears witness to Banda’s bravery in the face of death. He
is so astonished at the calmness with which Banda watches his little son die before him, that he cannot help
asking why God is so unjust to an apparently benign soul. Little did Amin Khan or the historians of those
days know about Banda Singh’s powers of meditation and deep attachment to the Almighty. That
attachment which had enabled Guru Arjun Dev to bear without flinching the tortures of the red hot iron
plate below him, was now helping Banda to take without flinching the thrust of the dagger in both his eyes
and the lopping off of both his arms and his left foot. Such bravery could only be displayed by a conscience
that was clear, and in complete harmony with God.
To close this account of Banda Singh’s character, let us now look at his achievements. When he
arrived from Nanded in the Punjab he had neither an army, nor weapons, no horses and no cannon. All he
had was a dream of an ideal — a reign of peace and justice. That dream had drawn the three or four types of
men under his banner, and had taken the shape of a revolution, which spread across the whole of the Punjab,
and into the states of the Rajas. The Mughal forces at Lahore, Sultanpur, Sirhind and Jammu were unable to
stem the flow of this revolution. Until the royal might at Delhi moved, this revolution had grown unabated,
and every menial villager had the right to espouse Sikhism and hold his head high in society. The serfs had
become the equals of their erstwhile masters. Guru Gobind Singh had sown the seed, and Banda Singh saw it
sprout into a healthy sapling.
From the military viewpoint, Banda Singh stands out as a General of outstanding talent. He realised
the need to join forces with the Sikhs at Keeratpur before attacking the mighty fort of Sirhind, and to that
end he made a detour around the north of the town to meet his friends near Kharar. He saw how strategic
Sithind was for the control of the whole of the Punjab. Then again from the defensive point of view he
realised he needed a safer retreat, and to that end he made Lohgarh his own headquarters. He strengthened
this fort by posting small parties on the numerous mounds along the valley that led up to the fort. All these
are proof of his extraordinary powers of judgement and leadership. After Guru Gobind Singh, the Sikhs had
found in Banda another leader who could inspire them and provide some unity to their divided forces. He
could achieve all this only on the basis of his own strong character. He was a complete Sikh in every sense,
and exhorted all who came to him to partake of the Guru’s amrif, and then retain the Sikh symbols and
continue reciting the Name. At the commencement of any action he was seen to go into meditation to make
his ardas before God.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
All his letters bear testimony to his personal humility and his firm belief that all his achievements
were through the grace of Guru Nanak and Guru Gobind Singh. He never assumed kingship as is sometimes
alleged by our historians. His seal of office and his coins are all in the name of his master.
In conclusion it can be said that under Banda Singh the serfs of the Punjab had their first taste of
freedom from their Mughal masters, though only for a brief period. This was the first real blow to the
organised exploitation of the Punjab. It laid the foundation for the real conquest of the Punjab by the Sikhs,
forty years later.
REFERENCE:
* Based on History of the Sikhs by H.R. Gupta.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
26
SIKH STRUGGLE AFTER BANDA
THARAM SINGH
June, 1716 marks the end of a short but glorious chapter in Sikh history. It also marks the beginning
of a critical phase, when the Sikhs were almost wiped out of existence. After Banda, the Sikhs had nobody
who could rally their divided and disheartened groups into any sort of a united force. Bhai Mani Singh was
there no doubt, but his was a peaceful and religious role, and this was a time when force had to be met with
force, as explained by Guru Gobind Singh in his Zafarnama to Aurangzeb.
A big division had taken place in the Sikh nation, when Baba Binod Singh disagreed with Banda
Singh and had vacated the fortress of Gurdas Nangal. This cleavage widened after the death of Banda, when
a group of his admirers under Mahant Amar Singh of Khem Karan, calling themselves the Bandai Sikhs,
assumed to themselves the control of the organisation of the Golden Temple. This squabble was settled only
in 1721.
In addition to this big division, there were minor splinter groups setting up their own gurus. One
such false guru was Gulab Rai, the son of Suraj Mal, one of the brothers of Guru Tegh Bahadur. Another
such guru was Kharak Singh, a descendant of a Sikh of Guru Amar Das called Gangoo. So this sect came to
be known as Gangoo Shahiay. Yet another section called Hindaliay set up their own guru, one Niranjan Das,
a descendant of a Sikh of Guru Amar Das called Baba Hindal, who was made the Guru’s preacher in Jandiala.
One of Hindal’s sons had turned apostate, and the Sikhs had condemned his whole clan for this
transgression. Niranjan Das became a tormentor of all Sikhs, informing upon them to the Muslim authorities
at Lahore.
To add to their woes, the Hindu landlords also turned against the Sikhs, and for material rewards,
they gave full information about the movements of Sikhs to the Mughal Commanders. So, when Farukh
Siyar gave Abdus Samad Khan full authority to hunt down all the Sikhs in the Punjab, the latter set about his
task with great eagerness. All Hindus were ordered to cut their hair short and to shave their beards, otherwise
they stood the risk of capital punishment. Orders were sent throughout the Punjab that nobody should
supply food or shelter to any Sikh on pain of death, and further that those who gave information on Sikhs or
who arrested them would be suitably rewarded. A price was put on each Sikh head. They were hunted down
like wild animals. They had no sanctuary except in flight. Some fled to the marshy jungle in Kahnuwan,
some to the jungles in the Malwa region, others to the hills in the north or to the sandy barren lands of
Rajasthan. Their families that remained were quickly exterminated, thanks to the information supplied by
their neighbours. Soon there was no Sikh to be seen in the Punjab in daylight. This inhuman persecution
lasted for almost five years from 1716 to 1721.
Then, for one thing, Abdus Samad got satiated with the killing, and for another, the situation in
Delhi took a change. The Sayad brothers, Hussain Al and Abdulla Khan, who had helped Farukh Styar
ascend the throne in 1713, were soon scheming to wield power on their own. They enlisted the aid of the
army officers and in 1719, had Farukh Siyar thrown into prison and later had him blinded and put to death.
Prince Rafi-ud-Darjat was installed Emperor, but as he did not exactly comply with their wishes, he was
poisoned to death after only three months. His brother Rafi-ud-Daulah was more amenable to their
instructions, but he too met the fate of his brother after a reign of a few months. Roshan Akhtar, a son of
Jahan Shah, one of the murdered sons of Bahadur Shah, was next selected for the unenviable post of
Emperor of Delhi. The boy’s mother pleaded with the king-makers to leave her son alone, but to no avail.
He was enthroned with due ceremony in September 1719, and re-named Mohammed Shah. His Minister,
Mohammed Amin Khan contrived to keep him safe from the clutches of the Sayad brothers, and he managed
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
to remain on the throne for 26 years, albeit as Emperor in name only. The Commanders in the outlying
provinces looked after their interests, each in his own way.
It was under such circumstances that Abdus Samad Khan loosened his iron grip on the Sikhs, and
the latter began to visit their own villages again, and to gather on festive occasions at Amritsar. By 1720,
some Sikhs could be seen in the plains on the banks of the river Beas.
On returning to their former villages, those who had left their families behind came to hear about
their cruel fate. There were many again whose lands had been confiscated or handed over to their
neighbours. The able-bodied amongst all these Sikhs bought or grabbed a horse, formed into small groups
and took to highway robbery. These raiders were the founders of the famous Sikh ms/s (confederacies) that
were to control the Punjab for almost 50 years.
These roving bands were soon raiding the towns for their daily needs of food and clothing, and
Abdus Samad Khan was too tired to take any action. With the return of some of the Sikhs to their former
occupation of tilling the soil and raising their families in the remote and more sheltered areas, the practice of
celebrating the Divali and Vaisakhi festivals at the Golden Temple was revived. The more devoted followers
of Banda had taken to his advice on the renunciation of meat. They were called Bandais and distinguished
themselves from the others (the Tat Khalsa) by wearing crimson coloured shirts. Their greeting to each other
was also different. They called out Fateh Darshan instead of the usual Khalsa greeting. The martyrdom of
Banda Singh had raised his status in their minds, and they headed for Amritsar during the Divali season in
1720, with the aim of organising all the celeberations and of taking charge of all the offerings that the faithful
would be making at the Harimandar Sahib.
On the other side, the followers of Kahn Singh, the son of Baba Binod Singh, had obtained approval
from Lahore to celebrate the festival at Amritsar. So his Tat Khalsa also closed in on the Harimandar Sahib to
take charge of all the celebrations. The leaders of both the sides were persuaded to make a joint organisation
on this occasion so that trouble could be avoided. The festival passed off without incident, but tempers were
high and the mood was explosive, and the Sikhs sent a report of this situation to the Guru’s widow, Mata
Sundri, at Delhi.
At the time of Guru Gobind Singh’s demise at Nanded, Bhai Nand Lal had already passed away
(1705) in his hometown Multan. The remaining Sikhs and scholars had returned to the Punjab. Foremost
amongst those scholars was one Bhai Mani Singh. In the year 1720, he was with Mata Sundri at Delhi, when
the Sikhs appealed to her for help. She wisely chose Bhai Mani Singh, sending him to Amritsar, as the head-
priest of the Harimandar Sahib. This man reached there in January, 1721, and immediately set about his
duties regulating the £/rfan sessions, and organising the use of the collections for the benefit of the needy. He
also sent invitations to all the Sikhs of the Punjab to attend the next Vaisakhi festival there (April, 1721).
At this gathering, he announced to the leaders of both patties, his plan to settle their differences once
and for all. He proposed to write down on two slips of paper the greetings of both parties, Fateh Darshan on
one and Waheguruji ka Khalsa on the other, to fold them up and drop them into the pool at the same spot at
the small steps behind the Golden Temple. The party whose paper surfaced first would be accepted as the
true leaders of the Sikhs and the other party must merge themselves into the winning party. When both sides
had signified acceptance of this plan, Bhai Mani Singh wrote out the two slips of paper and dropped them
into the pool. Both slips sank below the surface and there was a long wait, and that made the Sikhs very
apprehensive. If neither slip came up to the surface it would mean the loss of the Sikh hold on Amritsar to
the Mughals. Then slowly one slip emerged, and on picking it up they read the words Wabeguruji ka Khalsa.
The Tat Khalsa gave a loud cheer, and the majority of the Bandais present gave up their rituals and their
separate identity.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
With this problem solved, Bhai Mani Singh devoted all his energies to the preaching of Gurbani, and
the consolidation of the unity of the Sikh nation. He was gaining fresh recruits into Sikhism everyday. After
Banda, he took on the task of keeping the Sikhs together and in high spirits. For a brief spell, the Sikhs were
going about their daily chores unmolested by the Mughal police.
Then the Minister at Delhi, Mohammed Amin Khan, decided to act to strengthen his grip over the
Punjab. In 1726, he appointed Zakaria Khan, the son of Abdus Samad and his own son-in-law, as the
Governor of Lahore. Samad Khan was posted as Governor of Multan. From 1726 to 1745, Zakaria Khan
gave all his attention to the suppression of the Sikhs. He was energetic and he was skilful in battle. A new
round of iniquities descended upon the Sikhs who were just beginning to enjoy their well-earned freedom.
Zakaria Khan had learnt from his father’s failure that the Sikhs could not be finished off by the sword. He
adopted a double-edged weapon. He executed the able-bodied, but offered land to their families or the aged,
to settle down under his rule. He offered government posts to Sikhs only to liquidate them later, on some
charge or the other. He would allow peace loving farmers to till the soil, but he would kill any Sikh caught in
the jungles.
BHAI TARA SINGH WAN
Those who saw through this scheme continued their life in their jungle sanctuaries. The choudbris
(headmen) of the villages seized upon this opportunity to exercise their power over the peasants. Many peace
loving innocent Sikhs were martyred at the instigation of the choudbris. One such Sikh was Bhai Tara Singh of
village Wan next to Dal, almost on the present border between India and Pakistan. His father Gurdas Singh
had been initiated by Guru Gobind Singh and had fought in the Guru’s wars. Tara Singh had been initiated
by Bhai Mani Singh, and had commenced a life of service to all travellers who passed through the village.
There grew a thick hedge of thorny bushes all round his compound, and there was a small pit inside that
compound in which logs were kept burning during the winter months, to give warmth to those who rested
there. Many a weary traveller stopped at this hermitage and enjoyed the free food and a comfortable bed
before resuming his journey the following day. In addition to being good-natured, and a truthful Sikh, Tara
Singh was an accomplished swordsman and a good rider. During the hunt down of the Sikhs by Abdus
Samad, he had provided sanctuary to large groups of refugees.
In a nearby village Naushehra, the choudbry Sahib Rai displayed his arrogance by letting loose his
horses in the grain fields of the Sikh farmers. The poor men appealed to him to control the animals, but the
choudbry angrily retorted, “You should be glad I am not reporting on you to Zakaria Khan. Otherwise the hair
on yout head would be made into ropes for these horses.”
On hearing this taunt Sardar Baghel Singh and Amar Singh of nearby village captured the choudbry’s
horses and had them transported and sold to Sardar Aala Singh of Patiala. This outrage was duly reported by
the choudhry to Zakaria Khan who sent a strong force of a thousand horsemen to punish the occupants of the
hermitage. Needless to say the small band of about 20 Sikhs with Tara Singh died fighting to the last man.
NEW RESOLUTIONS AT AMRITSAR
News of the martyrdom of Tara Singh spread fast, and the Sikhs assembled in large numbers at the
Akal Takht at Amritsar. They passed a gurmata (resolution) approving the purchase of horses for all fighting
men, and their use in plunder of Government convoys carrying treasure to the towns. All those Sikhs who
had gone into the Kahnuwan and the Lakhi jungles emerged now to carry out these raids. Instead of being
frightened into submission, the Sikh bands turned bolder than ever. One party attacked a convoy carrying
revenue from Multan to Delhi, and seized 400,000 Rupees. Another party seized the treasure being carried
from Chawinda to Lahore. In the same manner, the convoys from Qasoor and Chunia were plundered. In
1727, one Murtaza Khan was robbed near Jandiala of a herd of horses he was taking from Kandhar for the
Emperor at Delhi.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Zakaria Khan had deputed over 20,000 soldiers all over the Punjab for the control of this
lawlessness, but the Sikhs could not be repressed. Their raids came up to the outskirts of Lahore, right up to
the gates of the fort. They had the knack of attacking a government force near wooded territory, and then
melting away into the bushes and trees. In the course of these disturbances, the peasantry suffered the most.
They were in no position to pay revenues to Zakaria Khan, who naturally had gone into arrears at Delhi. In
the year 1730, he was owing several millions for the past three years. The Emperor sent a force of 2,000
Rohelas to Lahore to demand the overdue revenue. Zakaria Khan packed two million Rupees in money-bags
and loaded these on carts, saying the whole sum due was in the bags. In order to cover up his underpayment,
he sent one of his Sikh employees Subeg Singh to inform the Sikhs about this convoy. As the Rohelas neared
the river crossing near Goindwal, they were set upon by a force of 8,000 Sikhs, who found no difficulty in
relieving them of their treasure.
Emperor Muhamed Shah despatched an army of 20,000 into the Punjab to punish the Sikhs for the
last outrage. By the time this force reached Lahore, the Sikhs had retired into the hills or the jungle. They
came down to their former haunts the moment this army returned to Delhi in 1731. They set about
plundering the rich choudhries with greater boldness. Those who had told upon them, to the Emperor’s men,
were also given special attention. And all this while, their ranks were swelling with fresh converts from those
Hindus who had been forced into Islam by Zakaria’s men, and who were refused re-admission into
Hinduism.
These Robin Hood style bands proved to be the training ground for the future leaders of the Sikhs.
Only those with great endurance, self-sacrifice, grit and dare-devilry could aspire to the responsible post of a
leader of men who were all self-disciplined and cast in the image of Guru Gobind Singh. The harsh
measures adopted by Zakaria Khan only added to the challenge. The dangers they faced and overcame
proved to be the forge from which men of proper steel were produced. It was during these days that men
like Sham Singh, Kapur Singh, Darbara Singh, Hari Singh Hazoori, Deep Singh Shaheed, Jassa Singh
Ramgarhia, Budha Singh Sukerchakia and Garja Singh showed up as outstanding leaders of men. Of these
men, Deep Singh, Darbara Singh, Kapur Singh, Budha Singh and Sham Singh had personally seen Guru
Gobind Singh.
THE HAND OF FRIENDSHIP
Zakaria Khan had tried all ways of holding down the Sikhs, but failed. He then deputed a
government contracter Subeg Singh to offer them a jagir (largesse) of one ak Rupees together with the title
of Nawab to any one leader of their choice. This offer was made at the Vaisakhi gathering of all the sardars at
Amritsar in 1733. It was rejected by each one of the leaders there, but the largesse was accepted in the name
of the Panth. When they looked around as to who should receive the title of Nawab, they heard the words of
Gurbani that was being read at the Akal Takht :
“Tahil mabil tako milat ja-ko sadb kirpal.”
And they spotted Sardar Kapur Singh fanning the assembly with a large hand-fan. From that day, he
was known as Nawab Kapur Singh.
THE BIRTH OF THE SIKH MISLS
With the receipt of the handsome largesse from Zakaria Khan, the Sikhs enjoyed comparative peace
for two years, under the leadership of Sardar Darbara Singh, who was a sort of Chief Minister and Cashier,
with Nawab Kapur Singh as the Commander-in-Chief. Bhai Mani Singh’s duties were confined to the
maintenance of the Golden Temple. A large number of Sikhs left for their farm lands, and set about
initiating others into Sikhism. Many of these recruits joined the roving bands of the sardars, after taking a little
training in horsemanship. The majority of them collected at Amritsar. By July 1734, Sardar Darbara Singh
died, and Nawab Kapur Singh became the acknowledged leader of the Panth. All the other sardars gathered at
Amritsar one day and advised Kapur Singh to reorganise the fighting force into smaller groups for ease of
management. Initially Nawab Kapur Singh split the army into two large groups, the Badha Dal (Senior
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Division) and the Tarna Dal (the Young Division). The Tarna Dal was later split into five jathas or camps,
each stationed at one of the smaller tanks in Amritsar. Their leaders were Sardar Deep Singh Shaheed, Sardar
Karam Singh, Sardar Kahn Singh Bhalla, Sardar Dasaundha Singh of Kot Budha, and Sardar Madan Singh
Ranghreta. Each one of the generals was given a flag and a drum, and the individual soldiers were asked to
join the general of their choice. Each camp had from 500 to 1,000 men, who sat down to eat from the
common kitchen. All the goods they acquired in their raids were paid into the common fund, whose account
was kept with the Budha Dal.
The Budha Dal, with Nawab Kapur Singh in overall charge had the following Chiefs under its wing :
Gurbaksh Singh, Sham Singh Naroke, Bagh Singh Ahluwalia, Bhoomia Singh and Kubher Singh. This group
occupied the territory around the Akal Takht. Jassa Singh Ahluwalia was then in his teens and helped Nawab
Kapur Singh by looking after the stores and accounts.
This strange truce lasted throughout 1734, with the Sikh forces relying mainly on the largesse for
their sustenance. They soon found the largesse insufficient as their numbers grew quite rapidly. The Tarna
Dal Chiefs then started moving eastwards out of the Punjab, into Hissar and Hansi territory. Wherever they
obtained their simple needs, they left the farmers unharmed. If anyone refused to comply, then force had to
be used on him, but their women and children never came to any harm. The only sufferer in this exercise
was the Emperor. The revenues due to him were now going into Sikh hands, and he put the blame entirely
on Zakaria Khan. When the latter saw that the Sikhs at Amritsar were quite small in number, he reverted to
his former policy of suppression. In 1735, he withdrew the jagir, and that drove the Budha Dal too back to
their old Robin Hood style of raids on the rich landlords or on the government convoys. They also forced
the village choudbris to hand over their half-yearly revenues to Sikh sardars who patrolled those areas.
PERSECUTION IS RENEWED
Zakaria’s Chief Minister Diwan Lakhpat Rai was assigned the special job of subduing the Sikh rebels.
The Budha Dal was then forced out of the Mayha territories by a force of 10,000 Pathans and Mughals. They
headed east and reached Barnala, where they were received by Sardar Aala Singh, who was then the Chief of a
large territory that would later form the State of Patiala. Aala Singh was most courteous to the Sikh sardars.
He was administered amrit by Nawab Kapur Singh. The Dal helped Aala Singh capture some towns up to
Sunam. Kapur Singh then attacked Sirhind, exacting tribute from the Muslim Chiefs of that area. He
brought the Budha Dal back across the Satluj from there and began collecting revenues from the towns of
the Doaba. They were joined here by the groups of the Tarna Dal, and feeling more confident of facing the
government forces now, they decided to celebrate the Divali festival of 1736 at Amritsar. They crossed the
Beas at Goindwal, and moved up to Khadur, and then to Taran Taran, donating large sums out of their
collections to the temples at these towns. The Tarna Dal encamped around Taran Taran, and the Budha Dal
proceeded towards Basarkay.
Lakhpat Rai, with an army of 7,000, surprised the Budha Dal at Basarkay. Although the Mughals
lost two of their generals, Salabat Khan and Qutub-ud-Din, they heavily outnumbered the Sikhs, who had to
fight a retreating action towards Choonia. Just about there, they were joined by some groups of the Tarna
Dal and they then began organising themselves into a line of battle at Hujra Shah Mugeem. A pitched battle
was fought here, and the Mughals were routed. The Budha Dal was still bitter over their defeat at Basarkay,
and they now pursued the Mughals with a vengeance, killing many of their generals, like Duni Chand
(nephew of Lakhpat Rai), Tatar Khan and Jamal Khan. Lakhpat Rai brought the remnants of his army back
to Lahore and the Sikhs celebrated Divali as arranged, at Amritsar in November, 1736.
Zakaria Khan was quite mad over this defeat, and immediately despatched Samund Khan at the head
of a large army. The Sikhs avoided a new clash and withdrew into the Riarki (the plain of the Beas)
plundering Kalanaur, Gurdaspur and Pathankot, crossed the Ravi westwards and captured Sialkot and
Wazirabad.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Zakaria Khan decided to occupy Amritsar and posted Qazi Rahman and another general at the head
of 2,000 men around the holy tank at Amritsar, with orders to kill any Sikh coming to bathe there. A fresh
round of atrocities began on Sikh families. They had to flee to the hills again. Thousands were put to the
sword. Bhai Mani Singh continued running /angar for all nationalities. He preached Gurbani, which applied to
all, and there were many Hindus and Sufi Muslims in his audience. Therefore, he was left unharmed.
Then in December 1738, on a charge of failing to pay up Rs. 5,000/- for holding the Divali
celebrations at Amritsar that year, the good Bhai was ordered to be executed by dismemberment joint by joint
in an open place in front of the fort of Lahore in full view of the citizens of the town.
The round of persecution did not cease with the killing of Bhai Mani Singh and the retaliatory
execution of the Qazi by the Sikhs. Zakaria Khan passed stricter laws, which forbade any assistance to Sikhs
ot their families. They could not visit their holy tank at Amritsar for fear of being shot down. Any
unfortunate ones caught by the government forces were submitted to various forms of torture before death.
Tying them on to spiked wheels which turned against each other in pairs, was a favourite method in those
days. The women were not spared. They had their children cut up before their eyes, and the pieces dropped
into their laps. They were made to work the hand mills to grind wheat for the soldiers. Soon there was not a
Sikh to be seen in the majha (territory west of the Beas). They took to the Kahnuwan and Lakhi jungles and
into the Mafya regions and to Rajasthan. Only the very brave still moved about at night near the Taran Taran
and Amritsar areas. One such pair of Sikhs have cut a niche for themselves in our annals. Bhai Bota Singh of
village Bharana and his comrade Bhai Garja Singh, a fresh initiate from the scheduled castes, were one night
moving towards Amritsar, when they were spotted by two Muslims. One of them said to the other, “There
are no Sikhs left any more in the Panjab. These must be some actors in disguise.”
These words cut the Sikhs to the quick. They immediately came out into the open road near Sarai
Nur Din, and with heavy poles in hand they held up all carts or laden mules going towards Lahore and
exacted toll from their drivers. Bota Singh also wrote out a short note in native doggerel, addressed to
Zakaria Khan, which said :
Letter written by Singh Bota,
cudgel in hand, (sofa)
standing in the road, (Rbalota)
charging an anna per cart and a cent per donkey (Kota)
Addressed to Khano, my sister-in-law, so says Singh Bota.
This saucy letter turned Zakaria Khan livid with rage. He dispatched one hundred horsemen under
Jalal Din to bring back Bota Singh alive. As they drew near, they saw the two Sikhs waiting in the road, back
to back, and with swords drawn. Jalal Din shouted to Bota Singh to give himself up as it was futile to fight so
many against him; but the two replied that they were there to die fighting. So Jalal Din ordered four of his
men to attack first. When all four were killed, he sent eight more, and then another eight until both the Sikhs
were killed. They had knocked out ten horsemen to prove a point — that the Sikhs were still very much
alive.
Whilst Zakaria Khan and his general Lakhpat Rai were engaged in this game of hunting down the
Sikhs, events were taking place in Afghanistan that were to have a profound effect on both Lahore and Delhi.
Por a moment, Zakaria Khan’s attention was diverted to thoughts of his own preservation.
NADIR SHAH’S INVASION - 1739
Both Kabul and Delhi have had a share in shaping the history of the Sikhs. Persecution from one of
them made the Sikhs take up arms, and the intervention of the other, gave them the opportunity to grasp and
to consolidate their power over large tracts of land in the Punjab.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Babar was the first of the Mughals to invade India in 1521, and seize power at Delhi by defeating the
army of the Lodhi Sultan Ibrahim at Panipat in 1526. Towards December 1719, Mohammed Shah Rangila
was placed on the throne inspite of the protestations of his widowed mother. Power slowly passed from the
hands of the Sayad brothers into the hands of Mohammed Amin Khan. He died in 1721 and was replaced by
his son Qamar-ud Din Khan. Mohammed Shah remained an Emperor in name only till his death in 1748.
During all these years Afghanistan (then known as Kabul) had been a part of the Mughal Kingdom, and at
the time of Mohammed Shah it was under Governor Nasir Khan. This man’s control over his province was
as weak as that of the Delhi Emperor. There was hardly any collection of state revenues. The soldiers had
not been paid for several years, which in fact was happening in Delhi too.
Such conditions of unrest and frustration provided an energetic outsider like Nadir Shah a golden
opportunity to seize power. A son of a poor shepherd in Khurasan, a province of Iran, Nadir had joined a
robber band when he was still a boy. He grew up to be its leader at about the time in 1717, when the
Afghans occupied Khurasan and later the capital of Iran. Nadit’s patriotic zeal was roused and he rallied a
strong band of horsemen who helped him regain Khurasan. By 1725, he had become a national hero, who
drove the Afghans out of Iran, and who became a sort of regent with a boy of the royal family as King of
Iran. In 1736, when the boy King died, Nadir assumed the title of Emperor of Iran.
The Afghans had invaded Iran several times, and to avenge these raids, Nadir Shah advanced upon
Ghazni and then Kabul, both of which were occupied in May, 1738. The Governor Nasir Khan was then in
Peshawar. As Nadir Shah rode out towards the Khyber Pass in November 1738, Nasir tried to block his
passage with a force of 20,000 ill trained Afghans, who were just no match for the fierce Khurasani
horsemen. By December 1738, Nadir Shah had crossed the river Indus, and the lush plains of the Punjab
stretched before him, literally beckoning him on. Zakaria Khan had made frantic requests for aid from Delhi,
but without success. When he himself came out to oppose the invaders at the banks of the river Ravi, his
army was just brushed aside (January, 1739).
Nadir Shah was an able General and a wise administrator. He accepted a gift of two million Rupees
and retained Zakaria Khan as his governor at Lahore. He then took as hostages a son of Zakaria and a son of
the minister Lakhpat Rai, and thus secure against revolt, he proceeded towards Delhi. As his whole army was
on horseback, his advance was rapid. Leaving Lahore on the 26th January, he reached Sirhind on the 5th
February, Ambala on the 7th, and Karnal on the 12th February. The Delhi army had been alerted in
November on the fall of Kabul. The generals dragged their feet in moving out of Delhi. Every fresh report
of Nadir’s advance struck terror into them. They took two months to move their large army and their heavy
guns up to Karnal, a distance of 75 miles. Here, they decided to give battle. They heavily outnumbered the
attackers, but had no discipline and hardly any heart for a fight. On the 13th February, 1739, within three
hours they had lost, over 20,000 killed or wounded, and the rest just scattered in all directions.
Nadir Shah entered Delhi as a victor on 9th March, 1739. He demanded 2.5 million Rupees as
retribution, but the Rangi/a Emperor had nothing in his government treasury. He threw open his personal
safe of jewels, and Nadir availed himself of all the diamonds and rubies of the Peacock Throne, and also the
famous Koh-i-nootr.
He left Delhi at the beginning of May 1739, taking with him a few thousand Indian girls (both Hindu
and Muslim), a large number of boys as slaves and thousands of elephants, horses and camels loaded with the
booty his men had collected. The hollow shell that made up the Mughal empire had been smashed open by
Nadir Shah with one sweep, and the Sikhs quickly moved in to collect the broken pieces.
During his stay at Delhi, the Sikhs had come out of their jungle retreats and had no difficulty in
looting all the countryside from the river Chenab to the areas around Karnal. Zakaria Khan’s police forces
were too demoralised to offer resistance. So Nadit’s arrival was most opportune for the Sikhs in the
replenishment of their depleted stores. Again when people learnt about his departure from Delhi, the rich
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
landlords and noblemen promptly evacuated the cities and headed for the hills, only to be relieved of their
gold by the long-suffering bands of Nawab Kapur Singh.
These bands got together and passed a resolution : Nadir Shah must deliver a part of the booty he
was carrying away from Delhi. Nadir, on the other hand, felt that his reputation was a sufficient deterrent to
anyone attacking him on the way. He had chosen the route along the foothills of the northern mountains to
escape the heat of the plains. His baggage train being heavy-laden, lagged well behind his main force, and it
was quite a shock for him to hear on reaching Akhnoor by the river Chenab, that all his slaves had been freed
by Sikh bands, who had also seized a large share of his gold. Sardar Jassa Singh Ahluwalia who had just
turned 21, showed a glimpse of his greatness as a leader by planning those raids, and by escorting the freed
maidens to responsible homes from where they could return to their families.
Zakaria Khan had accompanied Nadir Shah to Akhnoor, and Nadir asked Zakaria Khan who those
Sikhs were. On being told that they were all bands of poor sadhus, without clothing or riches, he asked;
“Then why don’t you burn their houses down to punish them ?”
To that Zakaria replied,
“Their only homes are the saddles of their horses. They can last long periods without food and rest.
They are known to sleep on horseback. We have put prizes on their heads, but their numbers keep
increasing. They are never despondent, but are always singing the songs of their Pars.”
With a sigh, Nadir admitted that in that case the Sikhs would one day rule the land. Then he
obtained a promise of a tribute of 2 million Rupees annually from Lahore, and confirmed the appointment of
Zakaria Khan at Lahore and of his son Shah Nawaz Khan at Multan (where Abdus Samad Khan had just
died).
MORE PERSECUTION
With the departure of Nadir Shah, Zakaria Khan took stock of his household and saw it all in ruins.
He decided to take full revenge on the Sikhs for all his misfortunes, and issued a fresh proclamation :
“No Sikh shall remain alive in the Punjab. It would be no offence to murder a Sikh or to loot his
house. Anyone giving information on a Sikh will be given ten Rupees. If he brings the head of a Sikh, he
earns fifty Rupees. Anyone caught helping a Sikh with shelter or provisions will be converted to Islam.”
So, the full machinery of the State was put to work to root the Sikhs out of the Punjab again. They
stayed a while in the Jalandhar Doab, but here also the new governor Adina Beg was compelled to take
action. So, for the next five years till 1745, the Sikhs went into hiding again in the hills or the jungles of the
Malwa regions or in Rajasthan.
SUKHA SINGH AND MEHTAB SINGH PUNISH MASSA
Zakaria Khan knew that Sikhs would always try to visit their fountain of Truth — the Golden
Temple. The choudbry of Mandiala was one Mir Musalul Khan, commonly known as Massa Ranghar. In
1740, Zakaria Khan assigned this man the task of watching around Amritsar for Sikh devotees. His guard
was augmented by government soldiers. Massa needed no further prompting from the authorities. He placed
his cot in the centre of the temple, and set about desecrating it to his heart’s fill. Street girls danced before
him while he dined and wined in the holiest of the Sikh shrines.
There would always be one or two Sikhs in hiding near the temple, waiting for nightfall, when they
could steal in for a dip in the tank. Sardar Bulaka Singh happened to be around when Massa was in
occupation. He hurried away with his painful secret and headed straight for Bikaner, where he unburdened
himself before the band of Sardar Sham Singh. From the assembly of Sikhs stood up one Mehtab Singh of
Meerankot, who declared his resolve to go and kill Massa or be killed himself. Another very brave man
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Sukha Singh of Mari Kamboki also stood up and asked permission of Sardar Sham Singh to accompany
Mehtab Singh. The whole gathering said their ardas for the success of the mission, and the two rode away in
the hot month of August disguised as two landlords bringing the revenue into Amritsar. They hung their hair
loose behind their necks (as the Pathans do), and held a cloth bag each filled with chips of broken pottery.
They reached the entrance to the Harimandar Sahib towards noon, when the guards were resting,
half asleep because of the heat. They tied their horses to the E/aichee Ber, at the right of the Darshani doorstep,
and nobody suspected them of being anything other than revenue collectors.
As they entered the Temple, they saw Massa sitting on his cot smoking a pipe, with a girl dancing
before him, and a few of his companions reclining half-drunk along the walls. Sukha Singh threw down his
bag at Massa’s feet and as the latter bent down to pick it up, Mehtab Singh pulled out his sword and cut his
head off clean with one stroke. Sukha Singh had meanwhile drawn his sword and made quick work of the
few men inside the Temple. They placed Massa’s head in a cloth bag and came away to their horses, and rode
away before the guards could get ready to challenge them. They reached Bikaner safely and placed the head
before Sardar Sham Singh. The gathering congratulated them and ordered that the head be consigned to the
flames.
Zakaria Khan summoned all the choudbries of the district of Amritsar and threatened them with severe
punishment if they did not find out all about the two Sikhs. Harbhagat Das (Niranjania) came forward with
the names and the villages of the two, and orders were immediately given for the arrest of the family of
Mehtab Singh. He had left his 7 year old son Rai Singh in the care of the village headman Natha Khehra. As
soon as he heard about the approaching soldiers, he took flight towards the jungles taking with him the boy,
his own son, a nephew and two friends. They were overtaken by the soldiers and all the men were killed
except the nephew who escaped during the fighting. Rai Singh was given three sword thrusts as he lay
clinging to Natha’s leg. The blade passed through his shoulder, his collar-bone and the side of his neck, but
he was later picked up by a village woman and nursed back to health. He was to grow up to be the father to
Rattan Singh Bhangoo, a famous Sikh historian.
BHAI TAROO SINGH BECOMES A MARTYR
What with such deeds of defiance by Sukha Singh and Mehtab Singh, and with an empty state
treasury, and the soldiers clamouring for their pay, Zakaria Khan grew daily more desperate and short-
tempered. He once had his Minister Lakhpat Rai locked up, and sent threatening notes to Adina Beg, his
deputy at Jalandhar to pay his arrears. Finding no fugitives on whom he could vent his wrath, Zakaria Khan
now turned to persecuting the peace loving citizens. Harbhagat Das of Jandiala was always active in his
spying duties. He mentioned the help that Bhai Taroo of Pulla (Amritsar District) was giving to those in
hiding.
Bhai Taroo was a model Sikh, just turned 22, who lived by tilling the soil, and sharing his meals with
all who travelled through his village. He had a sister and a widowed mother, both of whom had the same
spirit of service. Often had they gone out towards the jungle to supply food to the Sikh fighters in hiding
there. In 1745, an order for the arrest of the Bhai was issued and he was taken in chains to Lahore. In a fit
of rage Zakaria Khan ordered his scalp to be removed as he would not allow his hair to be cropped and this
cruel sentence was executed in full view of the public at Nakhas Chowk (now known as Shahid Gunj). He
remained alive for 22 days, and during this period Zakaria Khan was taken seriously ill with diseased prostate
gland. He died on 1st July, 1745 and Bhai Taroo Singh breathed his last a few days later.
A SHORT BREATHING SPELL
With the death of Zakaria Khan, a tussle arose for the post of Lahore between his three sons, and
this was not settled till January, 1746. Attention was, thus, diverted from the Sikhs, who once again returned
to Amritsar, and began to fan out all over the countryside in parties of a hundred or more, exacting food or
cash, and gaining more recruits into their ranks. During the Divali celebrations in October 1745, Nawab
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Kapur Singh reorganised the whole army (called the Dal Khalsa) into about 25 autonomous units, each under
its own Sardar, with full powers to carry out their own raids and to share their booty amongst their members.
These independent bands were to unite under their leader Nawab Kapur Singh in times of national
emergency.
These bands halted all the machinery of government for about three months. One of them was so
bold as to enter the city of Lahore in January 1746, towards nightfall, and to begin looting the shopkeepers
just as they were closing up for the day. When the government soldiers appeared they were riding away into
the jungle along the banks of the Ravi. By January, the fraternal dispute had been settled, with the eldest
Yahya Khan, son-in-law of Qamar-ud-Din Khan, as Governor of Lahore. He yielded a part of his father’s
collection of precious stones to Shah Nawaz Khan, who retained his old command of Multan. There is some
uncertainty as to what the third brother Mir Bagi was allotted, but Adina Beg continued as Commander of
Jalandhar.
Yahya Khan now gave his minister Lakhpat Rai firm orders to take personal charge of the army to
drive the Sikhs out of the area around Lahore. Lakhpat Rai chased those bands up the river Ravi and across
it into Eminabad district. He then returned leaving about 2,000 Sikhs settling down to camp at a site now
known as Rori Sahib (a temple in Eminabad).
The Commander of Eminabad was Jaspat Rai, the brother of Lakhpat Rai. This man was no friend
to the tired Sikhs, who requested nothing but a night’s rest there. Jaspat Rai ordered his army out and led the
attack from atop an elephant. The Sikhs withdrew as they fought until they reached Badoki Gosaian. Here,
they turned round and fell with great fury upon the government army. One Nibahu Singh Rangretta took
hold of the elephant’s tail and climbed up to cut off the head of Jaspat Rai. With his end, the soldiers fled the
battlefield.
Lakhpat Rai vowed he would not rest till all the Sikhs had been eliminated. He obtained Yahya
Khan’s consent for a general massacre of Sikhs, the peaceful as well as the fighters. So all Sikh government
employees or other inhabitants of Lahore were arrested. Amongst these were Subeg Singh, the contractor,
later appointed otal of Lahore, and his son Shahbaz Singh. On 10th March, 1746, both father and son
were tortured to death on the spiked wheels.
Lakhpat further ordered that the use of the word Granth Sahib was forbidden, and that the word Pothi
could be used instead. The word gur for raw sugar was to be replaced by rori or bheli, because the former
reminded people of their Guru. Sikh scriptures were seized and committed to the flames.
THE SMALLER HOLOCAUST, APRIL 1746
Finding himself free after the massacre of all the Sikhs in and around Lahore, Lakhpat set out in early
April at the head of a strong army, with some pieces of artillery, in pursuit of the groups of the Dal Khalsa,
sheltering along the banks of the Ravi. These bands were led by Jassa Singh Ahluwalia, Naudh Singh
Sukerchakia, Deep Singh, Sukha Singh Mari Kamboki, Gordial Singh Dallewalia, and Nawab Kapur Singh.
Lakhpat brought his guns to bear on the thickets where the Sikhs were hiding and so forced them
out and to retreat northwards. They had kept to the right bank of the river, and gradually retreated towards
the hills of Basoli. They had been charging into the enemy time and again while retreating, and by the time
they reached the hills, all their ammunitions were used up. They were thus hoping to scale the hills into
safety, but their hopes were shattered when a shower of bullets and stones greeted them from the hill slopes.
The hill rajas had been forewarned by Lakhpat Rai against sheltering any Sikh there. Apart from this hail of
missiles from the top, their horses were simply not used to scaling the steep slopes.
It was now decided to split into two parties. Those on foot should try scaling the hills and go on
through Kangra and Mandi towards Keeratpur. This they accomplished in about four months, with great loss
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
of life. The rest were to charge back into the enemy, and cut through them, to reach a river crossing further
downstream.
Kapur Singh, Jassa Singh and Sukha Singh came down upon the Lahore forces, with swords and
spears, and a bloody encounter took place, with heavy losses on both sides. A son of Lakhpat Rai was killed,
as also a son of Yahya Khan. Sukha Singh headed straight for Lakhpat Rai’s elephant, and would have got
there if not for a cannon ball that went straight through his thigh. He tore off a piece from his turban and
bandaged his leg to the saddle to keep the bones in position. Jassa Singh had meanwhile come to his aid, and
together they rode off through the enemy lines to the safety of the woods.
The bands had all joined up now, leaving Lakhpat Rai in great chagrin over their escape, and in deep
pain over the loss of his son. As they halted for the night, Jassa Singh and Sukha Singh addressed their men
thus :
“We have left the enemy behind us, but he is not far. Tomorrow he will come hard on us again, and
we are without weapons or good horses. Let us strike again and get what we need from them. This is the
moment to do it, as they will be asleep free of all care, thinking that we have run away from them.”
This was the spirit that fired new hope into disheartened men, and that made such leaders truly great.
True enough they found Lakhpat Rai’s camp unguarded, and so they gathered all the horses and weapons
they needed and came away into the woods again.
The next day, they were up and moving before dawn and so came down to where the waters were
slow and rafts could be used to cross over to the left bank. They then rode out across the plains towards
Hargobindpur where they crossed the river Beas into the Doaba. Here they were molested by the forces of
Adina Beg, who obeyed the commands from Lahore, but never quite whole-heartedly. So these Sikh
survivors crossed over the Satluj near Alipur and entered the Mafya regions some time in June 1746. This
engagement had dealt the Sikhs a crippling blow, costing them at least 10,000 fighting men. The leaders took
their men to various districts to recuperate and within 6 months they were ready to unite for further action.
AHMED SHAH ABDALI’S INVASIONS BEGIN
In November 1746, Shah Nawaz Khan attacked Lahore and defeated his brother Yahya Khan and
threw him into prison together with his general Lakhpat Rai and Moman Khan. Yahya Khan later escaped
and reached Delhi.
These disturbances at Lahore were just what the Sikhs needed for their revival. But, there was more
good fortune coming their way. Nadir Shah had been consolidating his rule over Afghanistan, since his
return from Delhi in 1739. The general at the head of his army was one Ahmed Shah, a Sadozai Pathan of
the province of Herat. Nadir Shah had grown extremely short-tempered and suspicious of late. On the night
of 9th June, 1747 he was assassinated by his own servants and Ahmed Shah ascended the throne.
Ahmed Shah had accompanied Nadir Shah to Delhi in 1738, and had seen the weakness of the ruler
there. To pay for the maintenance of the army, he had to conquer new lands. His own country had no
resources at all, compared with the vast wealth of India. Apart from that, he wished to enhance his own
reputation in Afghanistan by capturing a neighbouring country. He attacked Peshawar and drove out its
Mughal governor Nasir Khan in October 1747.
Just about then, he received an invitation from Shah Nawaz Khan to invade and annex the provinces
of Multan, Kashmir and Lahore, saying that he would co-operate fully in this campaign in return for his own
confirmation as governor of Lahore.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
In December 1747, Ahmed Shah set out from Peshawar, and arrived at the Indus river-crossing at
Attock. From there, he sent his messenger to Lahore, but the man was given a rough reception by Shah
Nawaz, who was then a different man. He had been won over by the Delhi minister with an offer of
confirmation in his appointment of Governor of Lahore. Thus, when Ahmed Shah reached the bank of the
Ravi on 8th January, 1748, the Lahore army of 70,000 prepared to oppose the invader. The Pathans crossed
over on the 10th of January and the battle was joined on the 11th. Ahmed Shah had only 18,000 horsemen,
and no artillery. But during the battle, a force of 5,000 Pathans of Qasoor under Jamal Khan defected to his
side, and he was able to crush the poorly trained forces of Lahore. Shah Nawaz fled to Delhi, and Adina Beg
was equally fast in running away to the Jalandhar area.
Ahmed Shah entered the city on the 12th January 1748, and set free Moman Khan and Lakhpat Rai.
He then ordered a general massacre. Towards evening, the prominent leaders of the city including Moman
Khan, Lakhpat Rai and Surat Singh collected a sum of three million Rupees and offered it as expenses to
Abdali, requesting him to halt the looting and slaughter.
Ahmed Shah appointed Jamal Khan of Qasoor Governor of Lahore, and Lakhpat Rai his minister,
and restoring law and order around the town by February 18, he set out towards Delhi.
Meanwhile Qamar-ud-Din Khan collected an army of 200,000 and marched towards Sirhind which
was teached on 25th February. Here he found that the Rohela commander of Sirhind, Mohammed Khan had
fled into the hills on hearing about the advance of Ahmed Shah. Qamar-ud-Din left his baggage and his
begums under the protection of 1,000 men at Sirhind, and advanced towards Machhiwara.
Ahmed Shah crossed the river Satluj at Phillaur on the 1st March at night, and reached Sirhind the
next day to find it almost undefended. On hearing about the capture of his begwms, Qamar-ud-Din hastened
back, and on the 11th March, 1748, the two armies clashed in battle at Manupur. Qamar-ud-Din was killed
in one of a series of skirmishes that went on for some days. His son Muin-ul-Mulk (Mir Manu for short)
took over the lead, and he made such a furious charge that Abdali’s men gave way, and fled. By 17th March,
Abdali was crossing the Satluj and heading towards Lahore, with Mir Manu following him, but at a safe
distance behind.
This train of events seemed to have been specially designed by Providence for the benefit of the
Sikhs, who lost no time in making the most of their good fortune. Yahya Khan had tried his best to
annihilate them during his short stay of 15 months as Governor of Lahore. But after October 1746, his
energies were diverted to his own welfare on account of the activities of Shah Nawaz and Adina Beg. Shah
Nawaz Khan was too preoccupied with the confirmation of his command over the Punjab by the Minister at
Delhi, to give the Sikhs much trouble. Then when the Afghan threat loomed in January 1748, he had called
up Adina Beg from Jalandhar, leaving the Sikhs completely free to raid and occupy large tracts of land in both
the Jalandhar and the Bari Doabs. During the two months that Abdali spent marching down from Lahore to
the battle at Manupur, the Sikhs were busy taking control over the countryside, and chastising those choudbries
who had informed on them. Rama Randhawa of Ghanayan, Harbhagat of Jandiala, Dharamdas of Jodh
Nagar, Sanmukh Rai of Wadali, the Khatris of Patti, and the Ranghars of Sheikhupura were amongst those
that were put to the sword. Village headmen would inform on Sikhs in future only at their own peril.
Whilst Abdali was engaged at Manupur, Jassa Singh’s band swooped upon Amritsar, which was then
under the charge of one Salabat Khan. This Commander was slain in the fight and his troops fled, leaving the
city and its holy tank in the hands of the Sikhs. The partly earth-filled tank was cleaned up, and the masses
were once more able to take their ablutions there.
When Abdali began his retreat from Manupur in March 1748, the Sikh bands under Jassa Singh,
Charhat Singh and Karora Singh gave him a taste of the same guerilla raids that had been applied on Nadir
Shah. Mir Manu was coming too far behind to bother Ahmed Shah. The Sikhs would swoop down on
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Abdali’s camp at night and make away with baggage and horses. They continued with this harassment till he
reached the banks of the Chenab. Here they stopped because Vaisakhi day that year fell on the 29th March,
and they wished to celebrate it at Amritsar.
This was the first Vaisakhi they had celebrated after many years, in complete freedom, and it also
marked a new phase in the organisation of the Dal Khalsa. The holocaust of 1746 had shown up the
weakness of small groups or jathas fighting under separate leaders. Nawab Kapur Singh proposed the
organisation of the army under one Commander, who would have a council of 10 sardars to advise him. The
whole Dal Khalsa was, thus, reconstituted from a federation of eleven mis/s or confederacies. When the
question of the leader was raised by the Nawab, all eyes turned to Jassa Singh Ahluwalia, who had by then
amply proved his qualities of judgement, daring and fighting prowess. The eleven s/s and their leaders were:
1.Mzas/ Ahluwalia (Jassa Singh Kalaal
2.Mis/ Faizalpuria or Singhpuria (Nawab Kapur Singh
3.Mis/ Sukerchakia (Naudh Singh
4.Mis/ Nishanwali (or flag-bearer) (Dasaundha Singh
5.Mis/ Bhanei (Hari Singh of Panjawar
6.Mis/ Kanhaya (Jai Singh of Khalra
7.Mis/ Nakai (Hari Singh of Bahirwal
8.Mis/ Dallewal (Gulab Singh of Dallewal
9.Mis/ Shaheed (Baba Deep Singh
10.Mis/ Karoria (Karora Singh of Patjgarh
11.Mzs/Singhania or Ramgarhia (Nand Singh of Singhant
Sikh soldiers were free to join the mis/ of their choice. All initiated Sikhs could be members of the
Dal Khalsa, and equal partners in the Dal.
A second important decision was taken at this Vaisakhi. They felt the need for a good fortress for
purposes of defence. They chose a site in Amritsar by the side of Ramsar, and immediately set about laying
mud-bricks into a wall six feet wide and ten feet high. This enclosure was called Ram Rauni (later Ramgarh).
There was room for 500 horsemen within this fortress, and 500 were accordingly posted there in April 1748.
Mir Manu had made leisurely progress to reach Lahore in April 1748. In his father’s post at Delhi
was now installed an Irani Shia named Safdar Jang. After Mir Manu had established himself firmly at Lahore,
he despatched his minister Diwan Kaura Mal to Multan, which had passed into the hands of Zahid Khan.
Diwan Kaura Mal overpowered Zahid Khan without much difficulty.
Mir Manu now turned to the suppression of the Sikhs. His patrolling units began capturing them,
with the result that the Sikh bands moved out of the Majha areas into the Jalandhar Doab. Here, so far,
Adina Beg had been fairly accommodating. The Sikhs caused no disturbances in this area, and he left them
alone. But, when he received a strict order from Mir Manu in June 1748, he gathered a large force and
attacked those assembled at Anandpur, killing about 500 and losing the same number in the operation. The
Sikh bands dispersed into the Ma/wa regions beyond the Satluj. Shortly after this, Adina Beg made peace with
the Sikhs on his own. He wanted them around to prove how indispensable he himself was to the Lahore
government. He even engaged a band of 100 men under Jassa Singh of Icho Gill in his army. This Jassa
Singh had somehow fallen out with the Dal Khalsa.
There was comparative peace in the Punjab till the Divali month of October 1748, when the Dal
Khalsa again assembled at Amritsar. Mir Manu immediately sent Diwan Kaura Mal with a large force to
surround the city. Adina Beg was also ordered to bring his army to join the Lahore force, and Jassa Singh’s
one hundred Sikhs were in this force. By the time Adina Beg’s army reached Amritsar, the Dal Khalsa had
stationed 500 men in the Ram Rauni and the rest had dispersed into the neighbouring jungles. A siege of the
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
fortress had been laid for over 30 days, and about 200 of the defenders had died while making their foraging
excursions out of the fortress to replenish their stock of food. At last, when all their supplies were used up,
the remaining 300 Sikhs resolved to make a final charge out of the fortress and to die fighting.
That night, one of the defenders, disguised himself as a Pathan and came out into the camp of Jassa
Singh of Icho Gill. He had not expected to see Sikhs amongst Adina Beg’s forces, and he said in surprise, “It
looks as if Sikhs are murdering the Sikhs inside.”
Jassa Singh decided to join his Sikh brothers and during the night he stole into the Ram Rauni
bringing in a large stock of food and weapons.
News had reached Kaura Mal that Abdali was coming into the Punjab again. Mir Manu was further
disturbed when he learnt that the new Minister at Delhi, Safdar Jang had appointed Shah Nawaz as Governor
of Multan. Diwan Kaura Mal, who at heart was a good Sikh, advised Mir Manu to come to terms with the
Sikhs to meet the twin threats to the State, and the Governor readily agreed. So the siege of Ram Rauni was
lifted in November 1748, and at the further request of Diwan Kaura Mal, the revenue from the 12 villages
attached to Harimandar Sahib since the days of Akbar, was restored. For such deeds of affection for the Sikh
cause, Diwan Kaura Mal is remembered amongst Sikhs as Diwan ‘Mitha’ Mal, the new word meaning ‘sweet’
as opposed to the original word ‘bitter.’
THE SECOND INVASION
Ahmed Shah Abdali came to know about the intrigues at Delhi, and that Mir Manu could expect no
aid from there. So in December 1748, he crossed the Indus again and began plundering all the villages along
his route, until he reached a place called Sohdra on the bank of the river Chenab. From there, he wrote a
note to Mir Manu, “Char Mahal, the districts of Gujrat, Pasrur, Sialkot and Aurangabad have been part of the
Kingdom of Kabul since the days of Nadir Shah. Pay up the arrears due and promise to pay future revenues
yearly.”
Mir Manu had moved his army half-way up between the Ravi and the Chenab, but had not had to
fight. He kept negotiating with Abdali, while he sent his courtier to Delhi to ask for advice. The Emperor
promptly agreed to pay the revenue of Char Mahal to Kabul. Mir Manu then paid 1.4 million Rupees as the
current revenue and promised to pay the same amount yearly. Abdali was highly pleased with this outcome
and retired to Kabul. His aim had been only to size up the strength of the victor of Manupur. Mir Manu, on
his part, felt quite free now to give his full attention to his domestic problems, and he had two big ones to
face. On the one hand, Nasir Khan who had been appointed Commander of the Char Mahal territory by Mir
Manu, was now instigated by Safdar Jang to rebel and take over Lahore also. On the other hand, Shah
Nawaz had reached Multan by April 1748, with a letter of appointment from Safdar Jang. He found no
difficulty in recruiting the army Generals there to his cause, and was gradually building up a large force of
about 20,000 in preparation for the capture of Lahore.
Mir Manu marched upon Sialkot at the head of a large army and routed Nasir Khan in July 1749. He
then despatched Diwan Kaura Mal to seize Multan. With Mir Manu’s consent, Kaura Mal invited a Sikh
force of about 5,000 men under Jassa Singh Ahluwalia to join him in this campaign. The two armies met in
battle in September 1749 about three miles out of Multan, and the Sikhs were of great help in the complete
defeat of Shah Nawaz, who was himself killed in this battle.
Mir Manu bestowed the title of Raja Bahadur on Kaura Mal and appointed him Governor of Multan.
The Sikhs stopped all harassing raids for the next 12 months and occupied themselves in repairing their
shrines.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
THE THIRD INVASION
In October 1751, Abdali’s courtier Harun Khan arrived at Lahore demanding payment of 2.5 million
Rupees as revenue due from the Char Mahal. Ahmed Shah himself was already on the move, leaving
Peshawar in November. Mir Manu tried to buy more time. He paid a sum of 900,000 and promised to send
the balance in a few month’s time if Abdali would only retire to Kabul. He sent an urgent appeal to Delhi for
a large force, and at the same time, he summoned the armies of Adina Beg and Kaura Mal. As expected,
Delhi ignored his appeal. Abdali received this cash offering, but continued to advance across the Jhelum and
the Chenab. He had 50,000 horsemen this time, with Generals Jehan Khan, Abdus Samad Khan and Abdulla
Khan in charge. By the 30th November, he was camped at Shahdra, and the Lahore armies faced him on the
opposite bank of the Ravi.
The Sikhs were persuaded by Kaura Mal to send a force of 20,000 men to help the Lahore army, but
suspecting the intentions of Adina Beg, they engaged only in one skirmish and withdrew.
Abdali spent over a month on the other side of the Ravi, ravaging the countryside for miles around
Shahdra, and sending all the rich choudbris flying with their families to the hills. Then one night, he moved his
army a few miles upstream, and took them across the river at Shah Daula. Before dawn the next day, he was
in camp at the Shalamar Gardens, within easy range of the walls of Lahore.
Against all advice, Mir Manu came out of his position on 12th April, and made a furious charge. He
almost succeeded in dislodging the Pathan forces, but just then misfortune struck. The good Kaura Mal was
leading his horsemen atop an elephant, when the animal’s foot rested on an old grave and sank into the soft
eatth. He stumbled and fell, and just then a stray bullet hit Raja Kaura Mal in the head, killing him on the
spot. Seeing him fall, that wing of the army lost heart and ran, and Abdali’s forces rushed up to disperse the
Lahore army, which quickly withdrew into the town. It is said that Adina Beg had bribed one of his men to
fire on Kaura Mal. Thus ends the story of one of the staunchest of friends of the Sikhs. His name has lived
in the hearts of the Sikhs over the centuries.
Mir Manu sued for peace, and Abdali having a high regard for his bravery and general ability,
retained him as his Governor over Lahore and Multan. He had this acquisition of the two provinces ratified
in the form of a treaty, which was signed by the Delhi Emperor.
With the dangers from both Kabul and Delhi removed, Mir Manu was now a free man to enforce
law and order in the Punjab. His advisers were now the gazis and mullahs, who quickly put all blame for his
defeat on the Sikhs who had deserted him at Lahore. One of his first acts was the withdrawal of the largesse
for the Golden Temple. He was further advised that the stability of his rule depended on the destruction of
the Sikhs, and to that end, he ordered their wholesale capture and execution. So from May 1752 till his death
in November 1753, he let loose on the Sikhs all the barbarities he knew. A price of 10 Rupees was placed on
the head of a Sikh. His orders applied to Sikh men, women and children. According to the historian Nur
Ahmed Chishti, “Mir Manu had ordered one thousand and one hundred Sikhs to be killed at the Nakhas
Chowk on Id Day”, and further “Mir Manu was fanatic to his fingertips. He would have a kilogram of the
holy threads of Hindus taken off and burnt, before he had his dinner.”
His cruelty to women and children is given special prominence in the daily Ardas of Sikhs today. Mir
Manu’s troops roamed the countryside like demons looking for victims, and the Sikh fighters who had taken
to the hills, came back to take away those of their families who had survived this carnage. They came back in
patties of fifty or more and often clashed with the troops.
Mir Manu met his end during one of these encounters. In November 1753, he was leading his
troops in the chase of a group of Sikhs near Tilakpur, on the banks of the Ravi, and about 10 miles from
Lahore. He was suddenly taken ill and died. According to his page Tahmas Miskin, he had been poisoned by
one of his own officers. Thus ended the career of a vigorous and capable Governor. From the Sikh
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
viewpoint, it was a timely end to a reign of 18 months of terror. Aziz-ud-Din, a grandson of Bahadur Shah,
was put on the throne in June 1754. He called himself Alamgir the 2nd.
The new Emperor appointed Moman Khan as Governor of Lahore in October 1754, but Murad
Begum used all her womanly wiles to entice the other Generals to her cause. There was constant unrest in
the city, and in December, the citizens invited Khwaja Mirza Khan of Eminabad to take over Lahore, which
he did without much opposition. The Begum then sent her uncle Abdulla Khan to appeal to Ahmed Shah
Abdali, who sent Jehan Khan at the head of 10,000 infantry and cavalry to defeat Mirza Khan in April 1755.
The Durani soldiers looted the town to their heart’s content, and left the Begum as the Governor, with her
uncle as her deputy. These two soon fell out when the latter usurped authority. The Begum then wrote to
Ghazi-ud-Din at Delhi, offering her daughter in marriage to the Minister. This man secured aid from Adina
Beg, who had been expanding his dominion from the Jalandhar to the Cis-Satluj area around Sirhind. A force
from Sirhind attacked Lahore and drove out Abdulla Khan in March 1756, but the Delhi Minister, knowing
the immoral character of the Begum, had her taken prisoner and brought to him at Sirhind. The Minister
appointed Adina Beg in charge of Lahore and Multan in return for a yearly tribute of 3 million. Adina Beg
appointed Jamil-ud Din as his Lieutenant at Lahore. With these arrangements completed, the Minister
returned to Delhi in May 1756.
Abdulla Khan had fled to Abdali at Kandhar. He now returned with Abdali’s General Jangbaz Khan
at the head of a strong force, and Jamil-ud Din hastily retreated to join Adina Beg in Jalandhar. This Afghan
army plundered Lahore once again, and installed Abdulla Khan as its Governor in October 1756. Soon after
this, Abdali himself invaded India for the fourth time.
THE FOURTH INVASION
From 1752 onwards, the Punjab was in turmoil. Whilst Mir Manu was busy pursuing the Sikhs and
killing them, their numbers increased. The peaceful Hindus found it more profitable to take up Sikhism and
join the bandits than stay at home to be fleeced by both the soldiery and the Sikhs. Thus, the Sikh
replacements were faster than their losses. A common saying amongst them those days was :
“Manu is our scythe and we are his weeds,
Ass he keeps mowing, fourfold we increase.”
Then after Mir Manu’s death, the unsettled conditions in Lahore gave the Sikhs full freedom to
consolidate their hold over vast territories. They imposed on the farmers the system called Rakhi, whereby
they guaranteed them immunity from government or other interference, in return for the payment of a fifth
of the produce of the land at each harvest. Theirs was the only organisation that could give protection to the
oppressed, and large numbers, who had suffered at the hands of the soldiery, or who had other grievances,
turned to the Sikhs, who admitted them as equals into their fraternity. It was during this period that Jassa
Singh of Icho Gill, who was a carpenter by trade, undertook the rebuilding of the Ram Rauni with red baked
bricks. He named it the Ramgarh. He was known as Jassa Singh Ramgarhia from that day.
So when Ahmed Shah advanced through the Punjab in November 1756, he had no opposition on
the battlefield. Adina Beg had nimbly moved out of the Doab and taken to the northern hills. The Sikh
bands hung on Abdali ’s flanks, harassing any stragglers and cutting off all his supplies. Abdali swore he
would punish them when he returned. He reached Delhi without further trouble and set about plundering
the city with a will. In this job, he was ably abetted by Murad Begum, who pointed out the houses of all the
tich nobles, and even the location of their secret vaults. Abdali’s soldiers not only seized valuables, but also
satisfied their lust on the women of the town.
Abdali moved down through Mathura to Agra, desecrating the temples and plundering the cities.
Having enjoyed approximately three months of revelry in and around the precincts of Delhi, Ahmed Shah set
out for Kabul on the 2nd of April, 1757. He had a train of 28,000 mules, camels and trucks laden with booty,
and each one of his 80,000 soldiers and horsemen was loaded with spoils. The setting was near perfect for
the Sikh marauders, who set to work on this helpless target from Karnal, and who carried on their nighty
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
raids on his camp right up to the river Chenab. Abdali could do nothing but watch himself slowly relieved of
more than half his treasure. He stopped a few days at Lahore, setting up Nasir Ali as Governor in Jalandhar,
and Timur Shah as Governor of Lahore with General Jahan Khan as his deputy. He left strict orders with
Jahan Khan for the chastisement of the Sikhs. Murad Begum did not get what she had worked for.
Abdali returned to Kandhar leaving 10,000 troops under Jahan Khan. This General quickly
organised the administration of Lahore, and then attacked Amritsar. The Sikhs had vacated the city and gone
into the Mada regions. Jahan Khan killed the caretaker of the Golden Temple and about 20 of his comrades
who had stayed on. The smaller shrines were pulled down and the tank was filled with earth. The fort of
Ramgarh was razed to the ground, and the residents of the city were plundered.
News of the desecration of the Harimandar Sahib reached the Shaheed mis/ which was camped at
Damdama Sahib (in Talwandi). Baba Deep Singh was then engaged in writing out a copy of the Granth
Sahib. He entrusted this job to his nephew Sadda Singh, and led his ~s/on the march through Mehraj, Lakhi
Jungle, Ferozepur, and reached Taran Taran on 10 November, 1757. By this time, this band had increased to
5,000 men. As he moved closer to Amritsar on 11th November, 1757, the number had risen to 10,000.
On the other side, Jahan Khan had called up all his horsemen from Lahore, and other forces from
the towns of Patti and Qasur. At the first clash, the Pathans were driven back. Jahan Khan then ordered his
Generals to fight a retreating action, moving towards Amritsar. Near the tank of Ramsar, Aman Khan, the
brother of Jahan Khan, and Deep Singh came face to face. Both these men received slicing wounds in the
neck and died there. (The Shaheed Ganj of Baba Deep Singh stands there now). The Sikhs continued
pressing the enemy inspite of sustaining severe losses, and pushed them right up to the banks of the tank, and
to the walls of the Akal Takht. Thousands had died on both sides by nightfall. During the night, the Sikhs
withdrew leaving Jahan Khan in possession at Amritsar.
The Sikhs entered into an alliance with Adina Beg, who was then in the hills, and both armies came
down upon Jalandhar, killed Nasir Ali, and sent the other Generals Murad Khan and Sarbuland Khan, flying
back to Lahore (30th December, 1757).
Shortly after this, Timur Shah agreed to retain Adina Beg as Commander of Jalandhar on payment of
3.5 million Rupees a year. The Lahore forces were sent out in many directions against the Sikhs in 1758, but
they came back always thoroughly defeated. The prestige of the Afghan armies disappeared. The number of
Sikh horsemen rose to 10,000 at this time. Had Adina Beg continued in alliance with the Sikhs, their
combined forces would have driven the Afghans out of Lahore and the whole Punjab.
Adina Beg was a craftly politician, well accomplished in the art of manoeuvring for a position of
advantage. He approached the Mahratha Chiefs Raghu Nath and Malhar Rao in January 1758, to aid him,
promising to pay them 100,000 Rupees a day when they were on the march. He also invited the Sikhs to join
him, but only to keep them happy temporarily.
The Mahrathas joined Adina Beg at Sirhind on 8th March, 1758. Abdus Samad fought bravely, but
his army fled and he himself was captured. The Sikhs knew Sirhind well, and they were ahead of the
Mahrathas in looting.
As the Mahrathas crossed the Satluj, Timur Shah and Jahan Khan collected their belongings and left
Lahore. Lahore was occupied by Adina Beg and his allies on 11th April, 1758. The Sikhs were invited by
him to join in the pursuit of the Durani army, which was overtaken at the crossing of the river Chenab.
Timur and Jahan Khan escaped, but their camp was seized and a number of Pathans captured by the Sikhs,
and brought back to Amritsar, to clean up the mud from the holy tank. The Mahrathas returned to the
Deccan in June 1758.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
The Sikhs spent these months building mud fortresses, the most notable one being the one built by
Sardar Charhat Singh at Gujranwala. They knew that a clash with Adina Beg was imminent. Adina Beg
appointed his son-in-law Khwaja Mirza Khan as Commander of Lahore, and made Batala, his own capital.
Sadiq Beg was appointed over Sirhind.
As expected, Adina Beg deputed his minister Hira Mal and all the choudhbris to gather forces to destroy
the Sikhs, and for the next four months, he and Sadiq Beg of Sirhind kept a hot pursuit of the Sikh bands
across both Amritsar and the Doaba regions. But this harassment did not last long. In September 1758,
Adina Beg was taken ill at Batala and died.
Even when Adina Beg was alive, the Sikh mis/s were steadily asserting themselves over large areas.
Charhat Singh in the Bari Doab, and Jassa Singh Ramgarhia in the Jalandhar Doab were very successful indeed.
But when Adina Beg died, there was nothing to hold these mis/s in check. They met for the Divali, at
Amritsar on 30th October, and passed a resolution that they were to occupy all areas in the Punjab. The Dal
Khalsa marched into the Jalandhar Doab and was met by Bishambar Das the Diwan of Hassan Beg (son of
Adina Beg) at the head of his army. The Dayan was killed and his army dispersed leaving the Sikhs masters of
the whole Doab. They then overran all the countryside between the Beas and the Ravi.
THE FIFTH INVASION : SIKHS RISE TO OPPOSE THE INVADER
In October 1759, with a force of 60,000, Abdali reached Lahore, which he occupied with little
opposition. The Mahrathas had withdrawn before him towards Delhi, and the Sikhs applied only their usual
harassing tactics. Abdali appointed Karim Dad Khan at Lahore and leaving Zain Khan in charge at Sirhind,
he advanced towards Saharanpur. The Mahrathas had raised the siege of Sakartal, and Najib-ud-Daula joined
Abdali there in December 1759.
Abdali moved into Aligarh and the Oudh regions, winning over their Commanders to join him in his
plan to oust the Mahrathas from Delhi. After a few minor skirmishes, he crossed the Jamuna and camped
opposite the Mahratha forces at Panipat.
At last on 14th January, 1761 was fought the decisive battle of Panipat, in which the Mahrathas were
completely routed. They lost at least 100,000 men in this battle, which sealed their future in Delhi and the
Punjab.
Having captured booty in this battle and a large number of Mahrathas as slaves, Abdali entered Delhi
and looted that city as before. He stayed on for two months and left for Kabul in March 1761.
Whilst Abdali had been waging his protracted wars around Delhi, utmost disorder had prevailed in
the Punjab. On the Divali of November 1760, the Sikh Chiefs assembled at Amritsar and passed a
resolution to attack Lahore. Jassa Singh Ahluwalia, Hakikat Singh Kanahya, Hari Singh Bhangi and Lehna
Singh mustered 10,000 men and occupied the suburbs. They then started plundering the town, but Mir
Mohammed shut himself up within the fort. He sent them an offering of 30,000 Rupees to buy them off the
attack on the state treasury. The Sikhs withdrew, but when Ahmed Shah arrived there, and heard the full
story, he transferred Sarblund Khan to Multan, and appointed Khwaja Ubed Khan at Lahore. He promised
to return from Kabul in six months time, to punish the Sikhs.
When Ahmed Shah had crossed the Satluj, his army was subjected to the usual guerilla raids by the
Sikh bands, and since his men were loaded with spoils he was helpless to retaliate. He would put up some
sort of a barricade round his camp at night, but some quarters would always be attacked, and a share of his
booty taken away. At the river crossing at Goindwal, a large number of the prisoners he was taking with him
were liberated by the Sikhs under Jassa Singh Ahluwalia. These nightly raids continued after Lahore. At the
Jehlum crossing, Sardars Jassa Singh Ahluwalia and Charhat Singh Sukerchakia were particularly active in
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
releasing all the remaining women and children from Abdali’s hands, and in arranging for their return to their
families. These two intrepid Sardars kept raiding Abdali’s camp right up to the crossing at Attock.
On their return from this mission in June 1761, the Sikh force of about 30,000 attacked and
captured Gujrat and Wazirabad. From there, they advanced upon Sialkot and captured that town after killing
its Commander Khwaja Mirza Jan in battle. They then moved down along the Riarki and into the Jalandhar
area, whilst Charhat Singh returned to his fort at Gujranwala. Jassa Singh and other leaders then moved
down the Sutlej, capturing Sirhind, Malerkotla and the Muslim pocket at Patti.
Ahmed Shah was still very sore over the losses he had sustained at the hands of the Sikhs during his
last retreat, and so in August 1761, he equipped a Durrani force under Nur-ud-Din Khan which entered the
Punjab and was promptly challenged by Sardar Charhat Singh at the Chenab river crossing. A battle was
fought there, and the Durranis gave way and fled towards Sialkot, actively pursued by Charhat Singh’s men.
He laid siege to the town, and when Nut-ud-Din escaped from there in disguise, the Durrani soldiers laid
down arms. Charhat Singh captured a great deal of war supplies, and carried them to his fort at Gujranwala.
All the other Sikh Sardars were busy now securing lands for themselves. Jai Singh Kanahya took
Batala, Jassa Singh Ramgarhia took Kalanaur and a large tract in the Jalandhar Doab. The Governor Ubed
Khan at Lahore decided he would try to control Charhat Singh who was too close to him for comfort. So, he
marched upon Gujranwala with a force of 20,000 and laid siege to the fort. As soon as the other Sardars
received a call from Charhat Singh, they set out for Gujranwala with their detachments. Within 13 days, Jassa
Singh Ahluwalia, Jai Singh Kanahya, Hari Singh Bhangi, Jhanda Singh and Gujjar Singh had arrived and
surrounded the besieger. Ubed Khan abandoned a great deal of ammunition and stores in his hurry to get
back to Lahore.
The Sikhs had now grown too numerous and too strong for any of the local Commanders in the
Punjab. They were now ready to take on the great Abdali, and the real tussle for the Punjab was about to
begin. In the words of Prof. N.K. Sinha, “The most glorious chapter of Sikh history, and one of the most
glorious chapters of Indian history was now to begin.”
THE SIXTH INVASION AND THE GREAT HOLOCAUST
On 27th October, 1761, the Khalsa assembled at Amritsar for the Divali festival, and a resolution
was passed at the Akal Takht to say that the Sikhs should punish the enemies of the nation, in particular the
Niranjanias of Jandiala. This sect which was founded by a good Sikh of Guru Amar Das, had turned apostate
during the days of Banda Bahadur. They had persistently informed against the Sikhs to the Lahore
Governors, and had been instrumental in the capture of the family of Mehtab Singh in 1740, of Mehtab
Singh himself in 1745 and Taroo Singh the same year, and then of a prominent Sikh, Sukha Singh in 1753.
Their current leader was one Aakil Das. His town was surrounded by the Sikhs, in January 1762, but he had
shut the gates, and was safe for some time. He wrote an urgent appeal to Abdali, who himself marched ahead
of his troops to reach Lahore on 3rd February, 1762.
The Sikhs had received information of his approach and had lifted the siege and withdrawn into the
Cis-Satluj areas of the Mafva. They plundered the regions around Malerkotla, and intended moving into the
Bikaner regions after that. They were then 40,000 strong, but had with them a baggage train of about 10,000
women and children, who were being escorted to safety in Bikaner. Ahmed Shah had been informed about
their position by Zain Khan of Sirhind, and he had immediately ordered this General to engage the Sikhs,
promising to come up with the main Afghan force to help him. Zain Khan was joined by Bhikhan Khan of
Malerkotla. They encountered the Sikhs at Kupp, six miles north of Malerkotla. The baggage train of the
Sikhs was then about four miles away and moving in the direction of Barnala.
The battle was joined on the morning of 5th February, 1762. The troops under Zain Khan
numbering about 20,000 with artillery, attacked first, and the Sikhs had never expected Abdali to join them so
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
soon. So when he turned up later with his 30,000 horsemen, the attackers had a decisive edge over the Sikhs.
But, to add to their difficulties, this time Abdali had at last caught the Sikhs in the same predicament in which
they had been wont to harass him on previous occasions. He also had the advantage of artillery and superior
rifles.
Jassa Singh and Charhat Singh realised what was happening and immediately ordered their men to
form a human wall around their women and children, and to keep moving with them towards Barnala. They
were successful in this manoeuvre, but at a heavy cost in lives. A large number of women and children had
been killed, but the bravery and example set by Charhat Singh Sukerchakia saved many more. Towards dusk,
the human shield formed by Charhat Singh’s men had enabled their families to reach Barnala and safety. The
Durranis were too tired after their long march and the day’s fighting to pursue.
This action had cost the Sikhs at least 25,000 in dead, and is remembered as the Great Holocaust.
Sardar Jassa Singh Ahluwalia was almost killed in this action. He had 22 wounds on his body, and Sardar
Charhat Singh sustained 19 wounds. This gives us an indication of how much of the action these leaders
catried on their own shoulders.
There was hardly any Sikh soldier who did not carry a scar from this action. Practically all their
goods had been lost. But the Sikh spirit was undaunted. As one Nébang Sikh remarked, “Only the soft and
unbaked ones have fallen off.” Hardly four months had passed, before they were up again and attacking
Sirhind, and by July 1762, they were raiding the country around Lahore. They had dispersed into the villages
around Bathinda, and we will leave them there to recuperate over the next three months, and follow the
course taken by Abdali.
Ahmed Shah rested a while at Sirhind. He had noted that Aala Singh, the powerful Cheif of Patiala,
had helped the Mahrathas with provisions when they were preparing for the battle at Panipat in 1761. He
had not taken any part in the last Sikh battle, but his fort at Barnala had obviously given shelter to the Sikhs.
Abdali sent an army that attacked Barnala, but Aala Singh had moved out, and eluded capture. Later, he
turned up at Sirhind of his own accord, and Abdali had him thrown into prison. Aala Singh used the good
offices of Abdali’s minister Wali Khan to purchase his freedom by paying 300,000 Rupees. Not only was he
released, but Abdali conferred on him the title of Raja. Aala Singh had all along advanced in life by bending
to the wind. He had remained on the best of terms with the Sikhs of Jassa Singh, and with the Mahrathas
when they were around Delhi and Sirhind. Abdali on the other hand showed good statesmanship in retaining
the friendship of a Chief who was already the most powerful in the Ma/va region. He knew that he would
have his hands full in managing the rest of the Punjab and Kashmir and Multan. He was at the same time
employing the policy of widening the rift between the Mayha and the Ma/wa Sikhs. Aala Singh died three years
later, (in 1765).
In February 1762, Abdali reached Amritsar, with cartloads of Sikh heads for display to the
population. He placed cans of gunpowder beneath the foundations of the Harimandar (Golden Temple), and
blew the temple up. He filled the tank up with the rubble from all the demolished buildings. On reaching
Lahore, he appointed Kabuli Mal as Governor there, and sent an expedition into Kashmir under Nur-ud-Din.
During June, July and August, Abdali moved out into the cooler regions of Kalanaur.
SIKHS RISE AGAIN
In May 1762, the mis/ leaders met near Barnala and decided on a surprise attack on Sithind. Though
very much short of weapons, they had nevertheless a large enough force to frighten Zain Khan into
submission. He bought them off for 50,000 Rupees, but as they were retiring, he came out of his fort with
his General Lakshmi Narayan to surprise them from behind. The Sikhs turned back and charged so
ferociously that both Zain Khan and his Lieutenant fled for their lives, leaving a most welcome haul of arms
and ammunition in Sikh hands.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
During the months of July and August, the Sikh bands were visiting Amritsar and then raiding the
Jalandhar Doab for cash. From August to September 1762, they encamped in the Karnal-Panipat region
purchasing arms from that area. By October, they were back at Amritsar fully prepared for their revenge on
the great Abdali, for whom they now had as little regard as for his appointed Commanders. They now had an
army of 30,000 fully armed men. Abdali learnt about this development, and despatched Jahan Khan at the
head of an equally large force on the evening of 16th October. The next morning was Divali day, and the
Sikhs fell upon the enemy as if this was their only chance for salvation. By evening, Jahan Khan realised he
was beaten. Thousands were dead and many had given up the fight. He himself fled during the night, leaving
hundreds of his men prisoners in Sikh hands. These Pathans were made to work the next day, to remove the
debris from the holy tank. The battle had been fought near the temple Pipli Sahib.
After the last battle, Abdali made another attempt to engage the Sikhs in a pitched battle, but the
latter had by then withdrawn into the Mada region known as the Lakhi jungle.
As soon as Abdali left Lahore, the Dal Khalsa met at Amritsar and was reorganised into two sections
again. The senior Dal headed by Jassa Singh Ahluwalia, comprised the following mis/s : Ahluwalia,
Singhpuria, Dallewalia, Karoria, Nishanwali and Shaheedi. This Dal’s duty was to punish the enemies of the
nation and to subjugate all to the rule of the Khalsa. The junior Dal headed by Hari Singh Bhangi, comprised
the following misls: Bhangis, Ramgarhias, Kanhayas, Sukerchakias, and Nakai. Their assignment was the
protection of Amritsar and the temples. In April 1763, the second Dal met at Amritsar and a Brahmin of
Qasur appeared at the Harimandar Sahib to appeal to the Khalsa for the recovery of his wife, who had been
abducted by Usman Khan, the Commander of Qasur. Hari Singh Bhangi, at the head of the Dal Khalsa of
15,000 men, attacked this well-defended town, and rescued the lady from Usman’s grasp. They then looted
the town and came away with a haul of gold jewellery.
Jassa Singh’s Dal then cleaned up the Jalandhar Doab of all opposition to its sway. It stayed in this
territory till the Divali of 1763 in November, when the Sarbat Khalsa held its customary reunion at Amritsar.
The Dal had a mission at Dina Nagar, where Adina Beg’s son, Jafar Beg was entertaining dreams of a Mughal
resurgence in the Punjab. In July, he had called up the Commanders of Pasrur and Kalanaur to join him near
Batala, where the detachments of Hari Singh, Charhat Singh and Jassa Singh Ramgarhia came up to give him
a crushing defeat. Jafar Beg fled to save himself.
When the two Dals met in November 1763 at Amritsar, the Sarbat Khalsa passed a resolution to
rebuild the Golden Temple. The foundation stone was laid anew on the 17th November by Sardar Jassa
Singh Ahluwalia. Just about then, news was received that Jahan Khan had entered India, and was moving
towards Wazirabad. The Sikhs rushed up to meet him at Wazirabad, where a sharp action took place and the
Afghans were routed. Jahan Khan was seen to fall off his horse and to flee towards Rohtas.
In December 1763, the combined Dal Khalsa set out to punish Zain Khan of Sirhind. They
attacked Malerkotla first, killing its Commander Bhikhan Khan, and then had Aala Singh of Patiala joining
them in the atack on Sirhind. The Patiala Chief felt he had to give some proof of his loyalty to the Khalsa,
who were still very sore over his failure to come to their aid at the hour of need during the Great Massacte.
Zain Khan was baited by the Tarna Dal into leaving his fort, and when he found himself cut off from Sirhind
by the units of the Budha Dal, he had to make a fight of it. He was slain and his army just threw away their
weapons and fled.
The town of Sirhind was then turned upside down for loot. No male Muslim was spared. The fort
was completely razed. This happened in January 1764. The wall that had taken the lives of the young sons of
Guru Gobind was identified by the older residents of the town, and the building of the gurdwara of
Fatehgarh Sahib was commenced at that spot. Only then was the Khalsa Panth satisfied that justice had been
done. They had fulfilled their vow to pull that city down brick by brick.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Nur Mohammed, the author of the Jangnama, who was with Abdali in March 1765 writes, “No man,
not even a bird was to be seen there except the owl...... the royal palaces of the city and its gardens, orchards
and water tanks were all lying in ruins.”
After its destruction, the city was assigned by the Sikhs to Budha Singh of Bhaika. Later, Aala Singh
purchased it from him for a sum of Rs. 20,000. The town controlled the province of the same name, which
extended for 200 miles between the Jumuna and the Satluj, and which had a revenue of over five million.
The leaders of eight s/s divided this territory and took charge of its revenues for themselves.
The method they used in this division is most amusing. Each Sardar or his deputy would ride into a
village, and leave some article of his dress or equipment with the headman as a sign of ownership. He would
repeat this excercise at the next village, leaving a shirt here, a saddle there, a head-cloth at the next, until by
nigh-fall he would finish up quite naked. There was never any dispute, if any other rider turned up later at the
village that had already been ‘acquired.’
After the capture of Sirhind and its outlying villages, the Budha Dal crossed the Jumuna and
ransacked Saharanpur, Ambli, Miranpur, Deoband, Muzaffarnagar, Jawalapur, Kankhal, Najibabad, Nagina,
Muradabad, Garhmukteshar. Karora Singh was lost in this action. They then turned back towards Lahore, to
await Abdali, who was said to be coming into India on his seventh invasion.
The Junior or Tarna Dal had come back to take control of the Jalandhar Doab, and then laid siege to
Lahore. Kabuli Mal shut himself up in the fort. Only after he had agreed to cut off the noses and ears of the
cow-killing butchers of the town, and to pay a large sum in tribute did they retire. Hari Singh Bhangi also left
behind a Sikh representative Tek Chand to advise the Governor in his administration.
THE SEVENTH INVASION
In March 1764, Ahmed Shah advanced towards Sialkot and Kalanaur, and then turned towards
Batala and entered Lahore. There were some minor harassing engagements on the way near Batala. After
two weeks in Lahore, Abdali received news of an uprising in Kandhar, and had to hurry back to Afghanistan.
Charhat Singh’s band followed Abdali all the way up to the Jehlum river inflicting their usual nibbling attacks
on his rear. Then this band came back and joined up with Gujjar Singh Bhangi to capture the fort of Rohtas
from Sarblund Khan. These two mis/s then occupied most of the territory between the Indus and the Jehlum.
Meanwhile the Nakai ~s/ moved from the Lahore precincts towards the southwest, to occupy the
lands between the Ravi and the Satluj, known as the Naka. The Bhangis went further to plunder the territory
around Multan and then crossed over to the right bank of the Indus to capture Dehra Ismail Khan and Dera
Gazi Khan. From there, they returned to the other bank to capture Khushab, Jhang and Chiniot. These
Bhangi raids made Nasir Khan of neighbouring Baluchistan cancel all his plans to go on a pilgrimage to
Mecca, and to join Abdali in his next invasion of India.
The Kanhayas were now in charge of the lands between Pasrur and Gurdaspur. The Ramgarhias had
established their control over Hargobindpur and the Rvarki (along both banks of the Beas river).
The Ahluwalias and Dallewalias were in control of the whole of the Jalandhar Doab. With the
exception of the cities of Lahore and Jalandhar, the whole of the territory between the Jumuna and the Indus
rivers was in Sikh hands, and all these conquests had been completed by the middle of 1764.
THE EIGHTH INVASION
Ahmed Shah Abdali had already made up his plans to invade India during the winter of 1764. Nasir
Khan Baloch was equally eager to join in. Abdali now received an urgent appeal for help from the Rohela
Commander of Delhi, Najib-ud-Daulah.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Abdali had set out with 18,000 men as soon as Najib’s courier arrived in December 1764. At
Eminabad, he was joined by Nasir Khan at the head of 12,000 Baluchis. Qazi Nur Mohammed was a
member of Nasir Khan’s army, and he has given a good description of the march, in the Jangnama. On
reaching Lahore, Abdali held his council of war to decide on a plan to engage the enemy, who was said to be
100 miles away, in the Lakhi jungle. To his intense surprise, he heard next morning that a Sikh detachment
under Charhat Singh Sukerchakia was attacking his provision camp just outside the town. Nasir Khan Baloch
brought his men out, and the hit and run tactics of the Sikhs continued the whole day. Towards nightfall, the
Sikhs disappeared, and Nasir Khan brought his men back into the fort.
Hearing that the Sikhs had retreated to Amritsar, Abdali equipped himself lightly and rode quickly to
that city. But the Sikh bands had moved away from there, and Abdali found himself challenged by only 30 of
the Sikhs who had stayed on in the Golden Temple. Their leader Sardar Gurbaksh Singh and his devoted
band raised their war cry Sat Sri Aka/ and charged into the army of 30,000 and offered themselves at the altar
of their Guru. According to Nur Mohammed, “They showed not the slightest fear of death.”
Abdali again destroyed a large part of Amritsar and returned to Lahore, from where he set out for
Batala, which was plundered. He encountered little opposition so far, but when he entered the Jalandhar
Doab, his advance columns were set upon by Jassa Singh Ramgarhia’s bands. Jahan Khan was already
experienced in Sikh tactics and he refrained from any attempt at pursuit, but the Baluchi Chief Nasir Khan
had to be checked by Abdali from that course of action. His orders to his Generals were strict, that they
should remain on the defensive only. As this army progressed through the well-cultivated lands of the Doab,
they seized whatever provisions of meat, sugar-candy, and oils they needed from the deserted villages.
This army crossed the Satluj at Machhiwara, where again the Sikh bands fell upon them to inflict
some damage. Abdali reached Kunjpura, via Pinjore towards the end of February 1765. Here he learnt that
Najib-ud-Daula had made peace with Jawahar Mal, and although Nasir still suggested that he should proceed
to Delhi, and gather all the forces together to come back “to fall upon the heads of these dogs (the Sikhs)”,
Abdali decided to return. His Durani soldiers were not quite happy with their successes so far, and were
anxious about their prospects on the return journey.
Abdali stopped at the deserted city of Sirhind, where Aala Singh arrived to pay his respects to the
Shah, Abdali expressed a desire to conciliate the Sikh Chiefs. He was willing to forgive their past sins, if they
submitted to him. He then made a grant of the province of Sirhind to Aala Singh for an annual tribute of
300,000 Rupees, and also conferred on him the rank of Maharaja.
Abdali crossed the river Satluj at Ropar in March 1765, and came face to face with the main Sikh
army which had by then returned from Delhi and joined up with Charhat Singh and the rest. It was no
longer mere skirmishing, but a frontal attack in regular battle formation. Abdali’s formation was : Shah Wali
Khan and Jahan Khan on his right, and Nasir Khan’s Baluchis on his left. On the Sikh side, Jassa Singh Kalal
(Ahluwalia) stood like a mountain in the middle together with the other Jassa Singh. On their right were
Charhat Singh, Jhanda Singh Bhangi and Jai Singh Kanhaya, and on the left were the Bhangi Chiefs Hari
Singh, Gulab Singh and Gujjar Singh.
The Sikhs pressed hard on Abdali’s right, and Nasir Khan was asked to go to the relief of that side.
As he approached, the Sikhs fell back, and Nasir Khan gave chase, thinking he had won the day. He had
gone only a short distance away from the main army, when the Sikhs wheeled round and began mowing
down his men like corn. Nasir Khan had to order a quick retreat to join the main army to save himself.
On the second day, Abdali had advanced only three miles, when the Sikhs came again. They are
described by Qazi Nur Mohammed as “stone-hearted and strong-armed affirs.” This time the Sikh left
formed their right wing, and their right had become their left. As soon as Abdali’s men attacked, the Sikhs
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
fell back. But this time Abdali’s orders were obeyed by all. They did not attempt any pursuit, with the result
that the Sikhs came again and again to discharge their muskets into the enemy.
On the third day, the Sikh s/s took turns at riding up to a reasonable distance in front of the Durant
army, discharging their muskets, and then riding away “without any shame or modesty” (Nur Mohammed).
For seven days, this daylong confrontation continued, until Abdali crossed the Beas, with great care
to avoid any surprise raid by the Sikhs on his rear. Then near Batala, according to the historian Rattan Singh
Bhangoo, a pitched battle is said to have taken place. But no such encounter is mentioned by Qazi Nur
Mohammed. Abdali did not stop at Lahore, but continued marching towards Kabul, reaching Rohtas
towards the end of March 1765. At Gujrat, the Sikhs had abandoned pursuit and had returned to Amritsar to
celebrate the Vaisakhi festival.
The Sikhs stayed on, repairing their temples at Amritsar for about a month. They then departed to
their respective territories to exert proper control over them. The Bhangi Chiefs Lehna Singh and Gujjar
Singh camped outside the fort of Lahore with 2,000 troops. Kabuli Mal had gone to see Abdali off at Rohtas
leaving his nephew in charge of the fort. The Sikh Sardars persuaded the Muslim gardeners employed in the
fort, to show them the easiest point of entry through the encircling wall. They secured an opening there at
night and took the nephew of Kabuli Mal completely by surprise. Sardar Sobha Singh Kanhaya who had
stationed himself at Niazbagg, eight miles south of Lahore, and had been collecting octroi there, now joined
his two comrades in the fort, and the three Sardars set about apportioning the town amongst themselves.
The eastern part was allotted to Gujjar Singh. The fort itself and the central area were given to Lehna Singh,
and the southern and western sectors of Lahore came under Sobha Singh.
The prominent citizens of the town waited in a deputation on the three Sardars, requesting only a
tule of peace. That was duly enforced by proclamation and the three Chiefs went round in person to see to
the proper execution of justice. On learning about these developments, Sardar Charhat Singh also arrived at
Lahore, to demand his share of the city. The three occupants could only offer him the famous Zamzama
gun. Charhat Singh saw no prospect of getting anything more, and so he accepted it and carried it away to his
own fort at Gujranwala.
Between April and July 1765, the mis/s were busy occupying as much land as they could, and this is
how they stood after that exercise :
Bhangis: The suburbs of Amritsar and Taran Taran under Karam Singh. This Sardar also held
Firozke, Kaleke and Bajra in the Sialkot district. Here Sardar Hari Singh held Kalewal, Chak Ramdas,
Chaubara. Sialkot was occupied by Tara Singh and Sahib Singh. Further west Gujjar Singh, with the aid of
Charhat Singh captured Gujrat and the lands of Waraich. Midh and Moosa Chula were taken by Ganda
Singh and Jhanda Singh; Miani was taken by Tara Singh Bhangi.
Abluwahas : Areas along the lower section of the river Beas river — Jandiala, Sathiala, Bandala,
Jalalabad, Varowal, and large tracts in the Jalandhar Doab.
Ramgarhias : Hargobindpura, Qadian, Matewal, and large tracts on the other side of the Beas.
Kanhayas: Batala, Fatehgarh, Gilwali and Panjeraian.
Nakai : The territory of Naka and Lamma.
Singhpurias : Singhpura, Khaparkheri, Saurian and Sainsara.
Sukerchakias : Most of the lands between the Ravi and the Chenab, and half the district of
Gujrat; also the salt mines at Miani, for which Charhat Singh opened his own salt-market at Ramnagar.
Beyond the Jehlum, Dhani, Chakwal, Pothohar, Sayidpur were all under his control.
After the Divali of 1765, the Sikhs asserted their full sovereignty over the Punjab by striking their
first coin of good silver with the inscription Degh Tegh Fateh, During the rainy months from July to
September, they stayed in their own territories and consolidated their positions. Between September and
December 1765, the two Dals met at Amritsar and moved eastwards in a combined operation into the
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
territories of Najib-ud-Daula, the agent of Ahmed Shah at Delhi, and came back with much booty. The
Budha Dal went further down towards Dhaulpur to help Jawahar Mal in March 1766, and then came back
to Delhi. In April 1766 it had an encounter with Najib-ud-Daula on the left bank of the Jumuna, across
Panipat and suffered a reversal. But the Dal shrugged off this defeat and continued moving across to the
right bank of the Jumuna river to plunder more towns belonging to Najib-ud-Daula. The Sikhs moved fast,
and it was not possible for Najib-ud-Daula to be everywhere to guard his territory from their depredations.
THE NINTH AND THE LAST INVASION OF AHMED SHAH
In December 1766, Abdali crossed the Indus with an army of 30,000. As he neared Rohtas, he was
challenged by a force of 7,000 Bhangis and Sukerchakias, who were easily defeated and dispersed. He was
joined here by the forces of some Muslim Chiefs of Gujrat district, and proceeded towards the Chenab
crossing. Here, he was again challenged by the local Sikh bands aided by the re-grouped force from Rohtas.
This attempt proved equally futile, and Abdali marched on to the districts around Sialkot. Here, he
summoned all the landlords of Sialkot, Pasrur, and Aurangabad and extracted a levy of 150,000 Rupees from
them for harbouring the “infidel Sikhs” and providing food to them.
As he neared Lahore on 21st December, the Sikh Chiefs vacated the town, Lehna and Gujjar
proceeding to Qasur, whilst Sobha Singh took his men to Pakpattan. On the request of the leading citizens
of Lahore, Abdali agreed to appoint Lehna Singh Governor of the town. He accordingly sent his emissary
with a gift of dried fruit and a letter offering the command of Lahore to Lehna Singh Bhangi. The Sikh
returned the fruit and sent a sample of gram together with a letter saying, “Fruit is for Kings like you. I prefer
a simple meal of gram. As for the governorship, my Guru has already bestowed on me the rule of the three
kingdoms.” Lehna Singh would not accept any post under a foreign master.
Abdali stayed on at Lahore, sending detachments under his Generals to plunder or subdue the Sikh
leaders in the neighbourhood. He attacked the fort of Fatehabad, 20 miles south of Amritsar, on 28th
December, but while he was busy there, a Sikh force under Charhat Singh and Lehna Singh attacked Lahore
and plundered Abdali’s provisions.
On 17th January, 1767, Jahan Khan, with an army of 15,000 went towards Amritsar. Here, he was
engaged by Charhat Singh, Lehna Singh and Gujjar Singh’s bands, and in the battle that lasted 3 to 4 hours, a
large number of Duranis were killed and Jahan Khan retired wounded. Abdali himself arrived to his aid, but
the Sikhs had by then retreated. Another group meanwhile attacked his baggage at Lahore and he had to
hurry back there. Once again to his frustration, the attackers had moved out to a distance of 15 miles by the
time he arrived there.
Ahmed Shah finally departed for Sirhind on the 17th January after appointing Dadan Khan Govenor
at Lahore. As he crossed the Satluj, the Sikhs attacked him again near Machhiwara. They could do this with
ease now, because the whole countryside was helpful to them as regards supplies and concealment.
Abdali advanced as far as Ismailabad, 30 miles south of Ambala, where he was met by Najib-ud-
Daula, who advised him against proceeding further towards Delhi. So he turned back from there reaching
Ambala on the 18th March and Sirhind on the 20th March, 1767. Abdali then came back to Machhiwara,
where he stayed for about a month. Some of the Sikh bands under Baghel Singh and others were active
during this period raiding Ambeta, Nanauta, Shamli and other places under Najib’s rule.
Abdali now prepared to leave for Kabul for good. He knew he had failed to subdue the Sikhs, but
worse than that, his own troops were on the point of mutiny. They had not received the loot they had
expected and had not even received the normal pay for some time. He was now getting old and tired of wat.
The cancer of the nose that had set in during 1762, was causing him acute misery. The man who had never
been defeated in battle, whose very name spread fear amongst his men and terror amongst his enemies, was
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
returning now broken in spirit, to live his last years in Kandhar. His General Jahan Khan died in 1770 and
Abdali himself died in 1772.
No sooner had Abdali crossed the Ravi in June 1767, than the three Sikh rulers of Lahore, returned
to camp outside the walls of the fort. Dadan Khan appeared before them together with the leading citizens
of the town. He was treated with courtesy, was sanctioned an allowance of 20 Rupees a day, and the
management of the town was taken over by the three as before, and without any disturbance to the citizens.
The other Sardars also set about extending their territories. Gujjar Singh Bhangi occupied
Rawalpindi and its suburbs and left Sardar Milkha Singh in charge there.
Budh Singh Singhpuria drove Sheikh Nizamudin out of Jalandhar, and acquired Behrampur, Nurpur,
Haibatpur and Patti.
Desu Singh, son of Gurbaksh Singh Bhaika, snatched Kaithal from two brothers Bheekh Baksh and
Niamat Khan.
Towards the end of 1767, the Sikhs were again plundering the territories of Najib-ud-Daula, who
engaged them first at Nanauta, again at Islamnagar in January 1768, and finally around Panipat Karnal in
March 1768. He was defeated in the last action, and the Sikhs were thereafter in control of all the territories
of the present state of Haryana up to Delhi.
From 1708 when Banda Singh Bahadur set out for the Punjab, to the end of 1768, the Sikhs had
been locked in a life and death struggle, first with the Mughal power, and then with the powerful Afghan
invader. It had taken them 60 years of blood and toil and an unshakable faith in their ultimate success (Raj
Karega Khalsa), to emerge finally as masters of their own destiny in the land of the five rivers. To what did this
nation owe such success ? What advantages did they have over the brilliant General Ahmed Shah, who
thought in 1762 that he had finished them off, and who yet left the country six years later knowing he was
beaten ? A brief analysis of these factors follows :
1. The strong religious character of the Sikh fighter and his intense faith in his Guru which gave
him great moral support in times of adversity.
2. Their self-denial and their ability to survive in the open.
3. Their good guerilla tactics.
4, The difference in calibre between the Sikh leaders and the Mughal Generals. The latter were
mere mercenary soldiers. Sikh leaders, on the other hand, followed the Sikh precepts to the
letter. Their integrity was beyond doubt, and they treated their men as equals and were always
ready to die for the Guru’s cause. Guru Gobind Singh says :
“Dharam chalaavan sant ubaaran
dusht sabhan ko mool upaaran.”
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
27
SIKH RULE AND RANJIT SINGH
GURDARSHAN SINGH DHILLON
The reign of Maharaja Ranjit Singh has been the subject of abiding interest for scholars and
historians, but, by and large, they have concentrated their attention on the military and political achievements
of the Maharaja. There is no doubt that he was a great military genius. His political objectives could not have
been achieved without his outstanding military ability, but this is an incomplete epithet to describe him
adequately. For, considering the times, the Indian background and the historical circumstances in which he
appeared, the great edifice which he created and the manner in which he fostered it, were, we believe,
primarily due to the religious background, approach and tolerance, and the catholicity of Sikh ethos in which
Ranjit Singh was born and brought up. Otherwise, he would have remained a mere war-lord and an
adventurer. Nurtured in the Sikh tradition and unequalled for the daring and originality of his many-sided
genius, the Maharaja gave the Punjab four decades of peace, prosperity and progress, the benefits of which
were enjoyed equally by all the communities. This paper is an endeavour to study the salient features of the
Khalsa Raj under Ranjit Singh, and to evaluate his place in the history of this region.
The character and the nature of his polity is a subject of controversy among scholars. Many writers
like J.D. Cunningham! and Sita Ram Kohli? ascribe to Ranjit Singh high and noble objectives on the basis of
which he carved out his kingdom, which became the source of power and pride for the Sikhs. Many others
like Prinsep? and N.K. Sinha* have characterized his polity as absolute despotism, which was the just outcome
of his military enterprise.
Kingdoms and empires have almost invariably been founded and maintained on the strength of arms.
Ranjit Singh had as good a right to carve out a kingdom for himself and his people through the exercise of
arms as any other ruler before or after him. In the ultimate analysis, the fundamental criterion to measure a
ruler’s greatness should be the manner in which he wields his authority. To what end does he use his power,
for the furtherance of his own personal ambitions or for the welfare of his subjects through the projection of
eternal values of truth, goodness, justice and freedom ? This is the fundamental criterion which we shall use,
and which we feel should be the only criterion for any kind of modern historiography. In short, our test
should be not how an Ashoka or a Changez Khan gets his power but how he uses it and the net result which
he achieves.
Both Carlyle> and Macaulay® lodged their protest against history being a mere record of ‘court and
camp’, of royal intrigue and state rivalry, of pageants and processions. According to Carlyle, the essence of
history does not lie in laws, senate houses or battlefields, but in the tide of thoughts and actions — the world
of existence that brightens, glooms, blossoms and fades. What gives meaning to history is not merely the
exploits and aggressive enterprises of the conquerors and kings, but how the victorious sword is used during
the times of peace. A ruler’s greatness lies in the vision he projects for the future, the message he leaves for
posterity, and the direction and dimension that he imparts to history. What mankind needs is peace, progress,
prosperity and a harmonious social order. A ruler can best be judged in terms of Arnold Toynbee’s well-
known historical formula of ‘Challenge and Response.’ The correct measure of a ruler is the vision — in
terms of initiative, depth and sincerity — that he has in responding to the need of the times, whether he is an
Ashoka or a Changez Khan, a Lenin or a Stalin.
In view of the above criterion we shall explain in this study how Ranjit Singh employed his power
and how other rulers of his times, great or small, directed their power to different ends. For this purpose we
shall also indicate very briefly the ideological background, which shaped his character and governed his
perceptions and personality. According to Lepel Griffin, “Ranjit Singh was so completely a product of the
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Sikh theocracy and so embodied the spirit of the Khalsa, that no account of his character and career would be
complete without a description of the religious system of the Sikhs.’
IDEOLOGICAL BACKGROUND
Sikhism arose in the sixteenth century as a new revolutionary ideology opposed in its fundamentals
to the contemporary and earlier religions. It challenged, on the one hand, the fanaticism and religious
hypocrisy of the priestly class,’ and, on the other hand, the religio-political oppression of the contemporary
rtulers.!0 Guru Nanak’s rejection of the Varna Ashrma Dharma and of the cult of gods and goddesses!''his
emphasis on the unity of mankind!” and the oneness of God," constituted a daring and a glaring departure
from orthodox Hinduism. He challenged the conventional yardsticks of religion and society of his times by
denouncing asceticism,'* idolatry,'> ceremonialism and the role of the intermediary agency between God and
man.!6 He exhorted people not to shun the battle of life, not to renounce their hearths and homes, not to
retreat to the private solitude of the hills and caves, but to live their life as householders. He introduced a
conspicuous note of world- and life-affirmation in his teachings by bridging the gulf between the spiritual and
the empirical realms of human existence.!’ The significance of the Guru’s message lies in emphasising the role
of religion as an instrument of liberation, personal as well as social. In the integrated vision of the Guru,
religion became a potential basis of freedom for man — freedom from tyranny, freedom from injustice and
freedom from ruthless religious conversion. The Guru thus laid the foundations of a catholic or liberal
religion, which was not a mere system of philosophy or a set of abstract ideas, concerning God and the
mystery of life and death. It was a discipline, a way of life which infused spiritual and social vitality in its
followers, and brought about a far-reaching transformation in their outlook. The Gurus believed religion to
be an effective vehicle of promoting the values of social harmony, love, equality, freedom and brotherhood of
man. They aimed at a social revolution that would lead to the emergence of an egalitarian, forward-looking
and a just social order.!8
The Sikh movement was not only an egalitarian social order; it was a plebeian political revolution as
well; but the pressure of circumstances prevented it from assuming spectacular dimensions. Nevertheless, the
rise of the Khalsa, the martyrdom of the Gurus, the saga of Sikh resistance to the Mughals and Afghan
invaders, carried a new message of hope, and kindled that spark in human nature which impelled men to seek
out a better and saner path for mankind. People looked with eager eyes to the rise of a messiah who would
finally deliver them from socio-political persecution of the contemporary rulers, and from tyranny and
oppression of the invaders.
The first bid for establishing the Khalsa Raj was made by Banda Singh Bahadur, but without much
success. Banda had an indomitable spirit, but faced with the over-whelming might of the Mughal empire, he
could not succeed in liberating the country from the oppressive rule. He and his 740 followers were tortured
to death.!? However, Banda deserves credit for laying down the foundations of the political sovereignty of the
Sikhs. On the Divali day of October 27, 1761, the Sikhs assembled at Amritsar, and passed a national
resolution, called gurmatta, to liberate Punjab from the foreign invaders and seize all their strongholds.”
The Sikh misls, which emerged on the scene, no doubt, had a great political potential, but through
their internecine quarrels, they had reduced each other to a state of political importence. George Forster, a
traveller, who was a keen observer of things, remarked; “We may see some ambitious chief led on by his
genius and success and absorbing the power of his associates display from the ruins of their commonwealth
the standard of monarchy.’”2!
Ranjit Singh was a characteristic product of the Sikh tradition, and was also the leader, who had come
to deliver the goods. Thus the emergence of the Khalsa Raj under him was neither an accident nor a freak of
history. It was a unique historical phenomenon, the outcome and the flowering of a prolonged struggle for
capturing political power, and must be understood in its true perspective. Bir Singh, a contemporary of
Ranjit Singh in his poetical composition, Bara Maha Guru Gobind Singh Ji Ka, refers to the period of socio-
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
political turmoil gone through by the peasant-soldiers or the Sighs, who had become Sardars (rulers) with the
Guru’s grace.”
RANJIT SINGH’S CAREER
Ranjit Singh became the chief of the Swkerchakia misl at the age of eleven years in 1791. In his young
days, he was an excellent soldier and the beau-ideal of youth. One of his ancestors, Budh Singh, had been
one of the Khalsas initiated by Guru Gobind Singh.*> He found the Punjab strife-ridden and chaotic, a loose
confederacy of powerful misl chiefs, lacking the corporate spirit, and indulging in petty intrigues and
dissensions. In the absence of a strong central authority, the state had become a prey to the Afghan invaders
on the one hand and to the Maratha and the British designs on the other. Ranjit Singh brought the wis/ chiefs
into submission, fired his people with a corporate zeal and led them from victory to victory so as to galvanise
a whole people with a sense of collective triumph. ‘He avenged the innumerable defeats, humiliations and
depredations suffered by India over the centuries at the hands of the Afghan invaders, by conquering a part
of the Indian territory wrested by them and more than that, by being an arbiter in the fate of Afghanistan
herself.’24 He rose to be the ruler of a powerful state extending from Tibet to Sind and from Khyber pass to
the Satluj. With his capture of Peshawar, he sealed the Khyber pass for ever, thus putting an end to the
tyranny and oppression of the invaders. He was both feared and respected by the British, who ruled over the
rest of the sub-continent. It has been acknowledged that in fulfilling his ambitions, Ranjit Singh used the
barest minimum of force necessary. Baron Charles Hugel records, “Never perhaps was so large an empire
founded by one man with so little criminality; and when we consider the country and the uncivilised people
with whom he had to deal, his mild and prudent Government must be regarded with feelings of
astonishment.”’?> Similarly, Captain Murray says, “It is difficult to suppress admiration in contemplating the
career of such a man, who, with so many disadvantages, succeeded, with so few crimes in elevating himself
from a simple Sardar to be the sovereign of a large kingdom, including Hindus and Mohammadans, as well as
the Sikhs, the only state in India, not substantially under British domination.”’*° Even Henry T. Prinsep, who
is a critic of Ranjit Singh, acknowledges that the Maharaja’s career was “stained by no bloody executions and
by much fewer crimes.”’?’
THE SIKH RAJ
In Sikhism, the inward and the outward, the spiritual and the empirical, are inextricably interwoven.?8
The Gurus believed that a combination of religion and politics was essential to achieve the ethical ideals of
human equality, freedom and justice. This combination is essential to abolish the evils of society and open
new vistas of peace, progress and harmony. A sound social order could be built and preserved only through
moral and ethical imperatives, and by abiding values of tolerance, humility, charity and compassion that
constitute dharma.
Ranjit Singh built his rule on religious foundations. He referred to his Government as Sarkar-i-
Khalsa, which derived its legitimacy from the Khalsa or the Commonwealth — the mystic entity in which
resided all sovereign powers pertaining to the Sikh community. He referred to his Darbar as Darbar-i-Khalsa.
He never arrogated to himself the title or powers of a despot. He never wore a crown, and never sat on a
throne. He attributed every success to the favour of God, and he styled himself and the people collectively as
the Khalsa or Commonwealth of Gobind. Everything was meant for the benefit of his subjects, including the
Sikhs, Hindus and Muslims, because the Khalsa aims at ‘Sarbat da Bhald (welfare of entire humanity). His
state salutation was Wabe Guru Ji Ka Khalsa, Wabe Guru Ji Ki Fateh (Shalsa belongs to God and its victory is
the victory of God). He was often heard saying that he was nothing more than a mere Nagara (drum) of
Guru Gobind Singh. He would say that while the literal meaning of Ranjit — the meaning which his father
had apparently intended while choosing his name in preference to his original name, ‘Budh Singh’ — was
victorious, its real significance to his mind lay in that it had been the name of one of the drums of Guru
Gobind Singh.”? Both the Guru’s drum and he himself announced the victory of the Khalsa, but were in
themselves nothing but instruments. On every Vaisakhi, he would go to Amritsar and make his salutations at
the hallowed centre, where the Gurus had inspired their followers, and had laid the foundations of the Sikh
society.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
His official seal bore the words — Akal Sahai (May God help). The term also indicated that the
Khalsa did not owe its allegiance to any earthly power, and that he acted in total devotion to Aka/ (The
Timeless Reality). Similarly, the coin of Ranjit Singh does not mention any particular person or king, except
Guru Nanak as the true emperor of both the worlds, spiritual and empirical. His coinage which was called
Nanak Shahi bore the inscription, which means, “Prosperity, power, victory and patronage, unfailing received
from Guru Nanak and Guru Gobind Singh.” He never struck any coin in his own name. He listened daily to
the readings from Guru Granth Sahib. On one occasion when the Akal Takht took exception to a moral
lapse on the part of the Maharaja, he humbly surrendered to the dictates of the Supreme Sikh Authority, the
Akal Takht, and readily bared his back for receiving public flogging as chastisement for the offence.
Born and brought up in the Sikh faith, Ranjit Singh was fully conversant with the catholicity of the
Sikh tradition, which left its visible impact on his outlook and policy. Religious bigotry, he knew, was
incompatible with Sikhism. The ideas of unity of God, universal brotherhood and welfare of all (Sarbat Da
Bhala), which summed up the basic tenets of Sikhism, enabled him to restore complete religious harmony in
his kingdom. Here, it will be worthwhile to compare him with the great Maratha ruler Shivaji, who had
directed his power to the patronage of Brahmins, cow and caste, and was known by the title of Gow Brahman
Pritpalika (Defender of Orthodox Hindu faith).*° All his ministers, except the Commander-in-Chief, belonged
to the Brahmin caste. His reign marked the triumphant establishment of an aggressive Hindu Swarajya
(militant political expression of orthodox Hinduism).°!
Ranjit Singh did not proclaim Sikhism to be the state religion, nor did he make any conscious efforts
to propagate his own religion. His catholicity of religious outlook was reflected in his according due respect to
all religions. This was fully in consonance with the principle of universal love and equality propounded by the
Sikh Gurus. Sikhism did not have an ordained priestly class that could rule in the name of Sikh religion. But
the religio-political views of the Gurus could be inferred from Gurbani and the lives and deeds of the Gurus.
In the vision of the Sikh Gurus, a sane human society was essentially a plural one in which each community
was afforded the opportunity to work out its genius to the fullest possibilities and potentialities. The Sikh
Gurus, who suffered martyrdoms to uphold the religious liberties of the people, laid repeated emphasis on
the unity of mankind in their bai. Ranjit Singh held fast to the values of justice, freedom and human dignity,
not through any defined statements or religious vows or policy pronouncements, but through stark deeds.
There is no denying the fact that it was because of his Sikh religious background, that he proved to be a more
enlightened exponent of humanitarianism and tolerance than his contemporary emperors and kings, or even
some of the so-called modern, secular or democratic rulers.
The spirit of forbearance and moderation displayed by Ranjit Singh was in sharp contrast with the
inhuman practices of the Mughal rulers, their plunder, greed, devastations and forced conversions. The
Muslim state in India, being entirely subordinate to the Church, had believed in waging a religious war (Jehad)
against the ‘infidels.’ It aimed at stamping out all forms of pluralism, whether political, religious or social, and
demanded total conformity in faith, belief, form and action. The ideal of the Muslim state was conversion of
the entire population to Islam and extinction of every form of dissent. Accordingly, non-Muslims were not
looked upon as equal citizens of the State. In order to secure the right of exercising their religion, they had to
suffer political and social disabilities and pay toll tax (Jaz). Under Aurangzeb there was large scale
destruction of non-Muslim religious temples and other religious institutions in northern India.
The Muslim rule in Europe was, without doubt, liberal as compared to the contemporary Christian
states, but its limitation was that it had to abide by the strict rules of the Sdariat, which was sometimes
interpreted arbitrarily by bigoted Mullas, resulting in serious socio-political discrimination. Of course, the
imposition of Jazia on non-Muslims was an accepted principle under the Shariat. The crusade or Jebad against
the non-believers or non-Muslim states with a view to spreading Islam, was also an accepted principle of
Islamic polity.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
In pre-Muslim India, the four fold division of Hindu society was looked upon as divinely ordained.
Manu laid down that a king should zealously guard and uphold this caste-based division. As a result,
Brahmins came to enjoy a special status, and laid claim to various immunities from the working of the
common law, even in matters of taxation and justice. In addition to those immunities, they enjoyed the right
to collect from the masses a regular tax called Brahman Avimasn, the only logic behind it being their claim to
divine favour as a reward for their good deeds done in their past lives.*? Evidently, there was no equality
before law. The state, too, became a party to the various discriminations made against the lower castes in the
name of a divinely ordained caste system.** Not only the perpetuation of acute and serious caste
discrimination against the S/udras and lower castes, and maintenance of the supremacy of Brahmins as the
sole interpreters of dharma, was the primary duty of a Hindu king, but the manner in which the Buddhists
were treated, involving their virtual elimination from the Indian sub-continent, is a part of history.*4 It is very
relevant to point out that in contemporary Europe of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the Jewish
ghetto, like the discrimination against the untouchables, was an established institution.
In the times just preceding the Muslim invasion of India, the Hindu orthodoxy was seen launching a
religious crusade against the Buddhists. The holy Boddhi tree at Gaya was burnt.35 A Hindu temple was
erected on the ruins of a Buddhist monastery. A large scale massacre of Buddhists was ordered. Such a
policy resulted in the alienation of the Buddhists from the Hindus and eventually led to their virtual
disappearance from India.*°
As against what we have stated about the Muslim rulers and Hindu kings, the most striking feature of
the policy of Ranjit Singh was the equal respect shown to all faiths. He did not treat the Sikhs as a privileged
class, and did not place any disabilities on his non-Sikh subjects. Nor did he interfere with the religious and
cultural life of other communities. They were allowed to freely practise their religions without payment of
any special tax. There were no discriminatory tariffs. His policy was free from bigotry or any kind of
narrowness of outlook and racial arrogance, inherent in the traditional Hindu system of caste. His
contemporary rulers, the Peshwas, could not be entirely free from the shackles of casteism and Brahaminical
chauvinism. Between one caste and another they could not always maintain the balance evenly.*”
Ranjit Singh gave complete freedom of expression and worship to all his subjects. Under him,
careers were thrown open to men of talent, irrespective of their religion, caste or class. Even when he
bestowed his favours, he endeavoured to maintain an even balance among Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims. Far
from demolishing the religious places of Muslims or Hindus, he was in fact generous in his endowments to
Hindu and Muslim places of worship. He gave liberal grants to Muslim places of worship. He gave generous
help to learned Muslims, and paid due respect to the fakirs and derveshs of his kingdom. He repaired the
Muslim monuments. The Sunehri Masjid in Kashmiri Bazar of Lahore, which had earlier been in the
possession of the non-Muslims, was restored to Muslims, and the tombs of Hazrat Data Ganja and Monj-i-
Darya were repaired at state expense. A Muslim calligraphist, who had transcribed the Ouran in an exquisite
hand and did not find a buyer to pay the price of his life long labour and was ready to leave for Hyderabad to
sell the Quran to the Nizam, was paid Rupees one “&/ by the Maharaja. He got the holy books of Muslims
and Hindus translated into other languages. He participated in the festivals of Id, Hol, Dusshehra, Vaisakhi
and Basant with the same enthusiasm as others. His Hindu, Muslim and Sikh subjects reciprocated these
gestures by praying for him on important occasions — when he launched a new campaign, when he won a
new victory, when he had a hair-breadth escape, when he was ill, or when he recovered from illness.
The minority status of the Sikh ruler was no handicap in commanding allegiance from his Muslim
and Hindu subjects. Surjit Hans’s argument that the Maharaja on account of his minority status per force had
to strengthen his bonds with the Hindus and pacify the Muslims** is untenable. Invaders, who came too
often, always imposed their minority rule through sheer force. In the background that the Sikhs had suffered
immensely and immediately before the Sikh rule, and the community had gone through one of the worst
persecutions at the hands of the Muslim rulers, it is extremely creditable for the Maharaja not only to give
equal treatment to his Muslim subjects, but also fully to trust his Muslim employees manning the highest
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
posts in his administration. In the medieval period, monarchs were not dependent on the votes of their
subjects, and the question of majority or minority was hardly relevant. The Muslim rulers, when they chose,
could be cruelly intolerant and oppressive towards the majority of their subjects. In this context it is idle to
indicate that Ranjit Singh’s policies towards the Muslims were influenced by any consideration of pacification
of the majority community who were mostly converts and were only marginally a majority.*? Besides, fake
postures towards the Muslims could never beget their trust in a manner and to the extent that Ranjit Singh
obtained. The revolts of Muslim generals during the Muslim history in India have been a common feature.
It, therefore, speaks volumes for the humaneness of Ranjit Singh that none of his Muslim generals revolted.
Even his fallen foes, once forgiven by him, gave him loyal service, and fought for the Sikh kingdom to the
last. In this context, the observation of Surjit Hans looks so meaningless and puerile. Ranjit Singh solved the
problem of multiple faiths by a policy of large-hearted liberalism. This liberalism, it may be reiterated, had its
roots in the Sikh faith. As a matter of fact, Ranjit Singh’s faith and Sikh ethos guided him inevitably along
this path.
During his reign, there were no outbursts of communal fanaticism, no forced conversions, no
attempts at bloody revenge, no language tensions, no second class citizens, no repression, no bloodsheds, no
executions and no tortures. Punishments wete humane. There was no capital punishment which even
modern governments have not been able to abolish. It was not awarded even when there was an attempt on
the life of the Maharaja himself. Such a thing is unknown in monarchical history, much less in the rule of a
despot. It is, therefore, both incorrect and unfair to call his rule autocratic, despotic, or personalised, when it
is seen that in modern India Mahatma Gandhi’s assassin was hanged. W.G. Osborne says that, “except in
actual open warfare he has never been known to take life, though his own has been attempted more than
once, and his reign will be found freer from any striking acts of cruelty and oppression than those of many
more civilised monarchs.’ It is to his credit that during his reign of forty years, he did not sentence even one
person to death. He bore no rancour against his Muslim predecessors, who were responsible for the
persecution of the Sikh Gurus, and had unleashed a reign of terror on the Sikh community.
Ranjit Singh’s employment policy reflected the basic liberal and humanitarian teachings of Sikhism.
The highest posts in his Government were as open to Muslims as to Sikhs and Hindus. Fakir Aziz-ud-Din
was his most trusted minister. Fakir Aziz-ud-Din was the Governor of Lahore, and was one of the closest
confidants of the Maharaja. There were many Muslims occupying high positions as Governors of provinces
and forts, and commanders of the armies.*! Muslims on their part proved worthy of the trust. Poet Shah
Muhammad shed tears over the fall of the Sikh kingdom.
Similarly, the Maharaja bore no malice towards the Hindus. He overlooked so many past instances
of Hindu betrayal of the Sikhs, whether it be that of Chandu Shah, who had played a role in the persecution
of Guru Arjun® or the Hill Rajput Rajas, who had invited the imperial forces to suppress Guru Gobind
Singh and his followers,“ or the role of Gangu in betraying the two younger sons of Guru Gobind Singh and
passing them to the custody of the ruler of Sirhind. This execution later invited the wrath of Banda involving
the sack of Sirhind. The other instances were that of Diwan Lakhpat Rai, who along with Yahiya Khan, was
instrumental in the destruction of Darbar Sahib, and Kabli Mal, who in his capacity as Governor of Lahore
had defiled the sanctity of the sacred tank of Darbar Sahib on the instructions of Ahmed Shah Abdali.45 The
Sikhs had resented the hostility of the Pathans and the Mughals and the treason of the Hindus, who often
became willing partners of Imperial forces and invaders in suppressing and oppressing the Sikhs. Ranjit
Singh forgot all this and entrusted talented Hindus with the highest responsibilities of the State. Misr Beli
Ram was the Revenue Minister of the State, while Diwan Bhawani Das, Diwan Ganga Ram and Diwan Dina
Nath were, respectively, Pay Master General, Accountant General and Comptroller General of the Lahore
Darbar. Hill Dogras Dhian Singh, Khushal Singh and Gulab Singh were appointed to the positions of
supreme authority in the civil apparatus of the Maharaja’s Government. Brahmins like Tej Singh and Lal
Singh were granted such influence as eventually raised them to the supreme command of the Sikh army.
Diwan Mohkam Chand was made the Commander of the Khalsa army. In fact, historians have strongly
criticised Ranjit Singh’s overindulgence towards the Hill Dogras and the Purbia Generals, and his misplaced
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
trust in them.These men subsequently betrayed the Sikhs and became the principal cause of the fall of the
Sikh kingdom.*¢
TREATMENT TO FALLEN ENEMIES
In dealing with his fallen enemies, Ranjit Singh displayed unexampled generosity. Not only the Sikh
nobles and Sardars, but also the deposed Muslim and Hindu nobles were provided with Jagirs and treated
equally and generously. In fact, the Maharaja’s treatment of the fallen Muslim foes was unprecedented. The
defeated Afghan Governor Sultan Muhammad Khan was given a Jagr of Rupees three akhs as revenues of
the areas comprising Kohat and Hashat Nagar. When he conquered Kasur from Nawab Kutab-ud-Din, he
gave him the Jagr of Mamdot which brought a revenue of 190,000 Rupees a year. In the same way, when he
conquered Multan he granted a big Jagir in Sharakpur and Naulakhe to the Nawab’s sons.*” He honoured the
sentiments of his Muslim subjects, and maintained the established Muslim tradition of State-grants to Ulemas
and holy men. There is an important entry in the Diary — News of Ranjit Singh’s court — 25th August,
1825, “The Qazis, Sayads, Alamas and Fakirs of Peshawar were given good &hilats, and each was given a Jagir
for his maintenance, when the Maharaja annexed Peshawar.’’48 When the victory procession of the Maharaja
passed through the streets of Peshawar, he issued strict instructions to his Sardars to observe ethical restraint
in keeping with the Sikh tradition, not to damage any mosque, not to insult any woman and not to destroy
any crops. The Muslim priests were so pleased, that they blessed the victor.’ No wonder the Muslim
Generals of the Maharaja were responsible for carrying his flag across the Punjab borders. In this
connection, observations made by Sit Henry Lawrence are noteworthy; “Members of the deposed ruling
families may be seen in Delhi and Kabul in a state of penury, but in the Punjab there is not to be seen a single
ruling family whose territories may have been conquered by Ranjit Singh, and which may have been left
unprovided by him. Not only the Sikh ruling houses, but those of other faiths too, were provided for by him
with equal munificence.”5 A similar observation is made by Lepel Griffin : “With all his rapacity, Ranjit Singh
was not cruel or blood-thirsty. After the victory or the capture of a fortress he treated the vanquished with
leniency and kindness, however stout their resistance might have been, and there were at his court many
chiefs despoiled of their estates but to whom he had given suitable employ.’’!
Here it will not be out of place to compare Ranjit Singh with the Marathas who had allowed the
Mughal Emperor Shah Alam I to languish in his palace with a niggardly allowance. By propping up the
Imperial edifice the Marathas had derived considerable advantage, but it was rather sad that they did not
mitigate the King’s pecuniary distress. This sordid policy had not only disgusted the royal house of Timur,
but had also roused the indignation of many Muhammadans in the country who did not approve of the
treatment meted out to the Imperial family. It was, therefore, not surprising that in September, 1803, the
hapless Mughal Emperor welcomed the English as deliverers.** Similarly, the treatment meted out by
Governor-General Dalhousie to the royal house of Sikhs, reflected no credit on the British. The minor
Maharaja Dalip Singh was converted to Christianity, given a meagre pension of Rs. 13,000 per annum and
after separating him from his mother, was sent to England. Maharani Jindan, called the ‘mother of the
Khalsa,’ was also treated very shabbily, and was forced to leave the country. In pursuance of his Imperial
policies, Dalhousie abolished all military grants to the Sikh Sardars. Henry Lawrence, as head of the Board of
Control, responsible for the administration of Punjab, recommended slight leniency towards the Sikh nobility.
But Dalhousie insisted that Jagirdars deserved “little but maintenance.’>> Henry Lawrence tendered his
resignation over this issue.
Among the notable traits of Ranjit Singh’s character were his kindness and the total absence of
malice, cruelty or vindictiveness. These being so uncommon in the context of his times, were evidently due
to the Sikh tradition and ethos in which he had been nurtured, conditioned and motivated. His regime was
not stained by such dark blots as was the Mughal rule. For, there are numerous instances like the cruel death
of Dara Shikoh at the hands of his own brother, or the diabolical murders of twenty one captains of Ali
Wardi Khan, or the degradation and blinding of Emperor Shah Alam I.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
The Marathas knew how to conquer, but not how to govern. Though they were the strong
exponents of Hindu Swarajya, yet outside the Swarajya they plundered Hindus as ruthlessly as Muslims so that
their claim to be serving the cause of Hinduism was falsified.*+ Here it will be worthwhile to give another
historical analogy of the British Governors Clive and Warren Hastings, both of whom had to face disgrace
and degradation on account of their involvement on charges of corruption, bribery and extortion.*> Both of
them were impeached. Clive who is regarded as the founder of the British Empire in India, committed
suicide in disgrace and frustration.
Similarly, Alfanso Albuquerque, the founder of the Portuguese Empire in India, tried to establish
Christianity in his territory with sword and fire.*°° In its religious zeal, the Portuguese power became ruthless,
and issued charters from time to time making invidious distinctions between Christians and non-Christians
and subjecting the latter to untold disabilities. An enactment was passed debarring all non-Christians from
holding any public office. In pursuance of another enactment, the property of non-Christian orphans was
confiscated if they refused to be converted to Christianity. Under pain of being proceeded against by the law
of the land, the people of Goa were prohibited from using their native language Konkani, and were forced to
learn the Portuguese language within a period of three years. The aim of all these enactments was to compel
the natives either to accept Christianity or to leave the state.*”
To describe Ranjit Singh’s rule as military despotism is to do a great injustice to him. A comparative
study of the contemporary Governments in the West reveals that Ranjit Singh’s rule was more humane and
popular. Contemporary tulers in the West were known for their highly centralised and despotic rule,
whether it was that of autocratic Napoleon Bonaparte (1804-15), or of the inglorious Louis XVHI (1814-24),
ot of the vindictive Bourbon Charles X (1824-30), or of the self-centred Louis Phillippe (1830-48) in France,
ot of George II, IV and William IV in England, or for that matter, of the tyrant Czar Nicholas I (1826-55) in
Russia. Let us amplify the point in respect of Napoleon. The French Revolution was the flower of the
centuries following the Reformation and the Renaissance. And yet, Napoleon buried that flower before it
could fructify into a tangible fruit. It is not in doubt that he virtually destroyed the ideas and ethos of the
Revolution that produced him. But the point for study is whether the ideas that led to the Revolution and
which were easily smothered and distorted by Napoleon, an upstart, were really so great. Factually,
Reformation in one sense belittled the Christian ethos, and its supremacy over the political life came to an
end. The states came to be governed by the whims of the rulers, political elites or the nobles. Ultimately it
revived, as Toynbee laments, the parochial Greek idea of the national state being the goddess, thereby
involving the gradual erosion of Christian ethos, even in the social life. Rational concepts and dry ideas have
no meaning, unless they influence human and social behaviour. To us it appears a contradiction to say that
the French Revolution was a great event of history, even though it was destroyed in the country of its birth
within half a dozen years. As against it, Sikhism was a movement that changed the life and motivations of a
people, with the result that even an unlettered person, when he came to power, created a socio-political
administration that was remarkably humane and just, even though, he belonged to a community that was in a
microscopic minority. Ranjit Singh’s conquests were not to bring glorification to his person, community or
people but to give peace to Punjab by stopping, once and for all, a thousand year wave of invaders that had
subjected Punjabis to perpetual loot, massacres, butchery and disgrace. As stated above, Ranjit Singh won the
hearts of his people, including Muslims and Hindus, by giving them peace, security and justice, and not by
any sense of glorification or threat or terror. What we mean to stress is that religious thought and ethos that
permeate and affect the moral life, behaviour and sentiments of a people, are far more enduring and
meaningful than rational concepts that generally remain ethereal and short-lived, and fail to influence human
motivations. So, to us the inference is obvious enough that, in comparison, it is not that Napoleon was a
villain and Ranjit Singh a saint, but that the ideology that produced Ranjit Singh was far superior to the ideas
and thinking that preceded Napoleon and the French Revolution.
Ranjit Singh’s rule was, on the whole, humanitarian and compassionate. In fact, his clear attempt at
self-effacement and avoidance of any personal elevation, while giving credit to God, Guru and the Khalsa,
would suggest a kind of rule, beneficient, free from wanton atrocities, and solicitous of the public zeal.°* In its
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
contemporary world it is the most inspiring example of a just state. That rule is, thus, full of lessons even for
present day politics. Captain Murray pays the most befitting tribute to the Maharaja in these words, “Ranjit
Singh has been likened to Mehmet Ali and to Napoleon ...... There are some points in which he resembles
both; but estimating his character with reference to his circumstances and positions, he is perhaps a more
remarkable man than either ...... There was no ferocity in his disposition, and he never punished a criminal
with death, even under circumstances of aggravated offence. Humanity indeed, or rather tenderness for life,
was a trait in the character of Ranjit Singh. There is no instance of his having wantonly imbued his hands in
blood.”®? Similar observations were made by Jawahar Lal Nehru in his book ‘Discovery of India’ : “He (Ranjit
Singh) was remarkably humane at a time when India and the world seethed with callousness and inhumanity.
He built up a kingdom and a powerful army and yet he disliked bloodshed ...... He abolished the death
sentence for every crime, however heinous it might be, when in England even petty pilferers had to face
death.’’5°4
The habitual meekness of spirit which the Maharaja displayed even at the peak of his glory, the
sympathy which he showed to the fallen foes and the compassion he had for animals demonstrated the
breadth of his vision and the catholicity of his temper. It was quite in keeping with Sikh tradition and the
Scriptural injuction, “To exercise forbearance in the midst of power, to be humble in the midst of honour.’
G.L. Chopra believes that considering the social and political conditions of the country over which he ruled,
the Government of Maharaja Ranjit Singh was “surprisingly mild and merciful.”*! On one occasion he is said
to have punished one of his generals for killing a Koe/ (nightingale) when she was warbling. Nobody was
allowed to hurt a swan, a parrot or a sparrow. Cow slaughter was banned throughout the Empire in
deference to the wishes of his Hindu subjects.
SIKH ADMINISTRATION
A distinguishing feature of the Khalsa Raj was an orderly system of administration based upon
territorial divisions like that of Swbas, Parganas, Tapas and Mauzas (village). The administrative hierarchy of the
Nazim, the Kardar, the Chaudhary and the Mugaddam, linked the far flung villages of the Sikh Empire to the
capital city of Lahore. Thus, Ranjit Singh exercised his authority on the basis of the willing co-operation of
indigenous socio-political institutions. He made no innovations in the civil administration of his dominions,
but tried to improve the old arrangements. The stability of Ranjit Singh’s regime also rested upon
moderation in what the state expropriated from the peasantry as its share of the agricultural produce.
According to one source, the Government’s shate varied between two-fifth to one-third of the gross
produce.® An agricultural tax of this order was in keeping with what the state could legitimately demand from
the peasantry. The revenue could be paid in cash or kind and in easy instalments. A notable achievement of
the Maharaja was that the ownership of the land was vested in the cultivator,®+ from whom the revenue was
collected directly without the intervention of the middleman, an institution he summarily dispensed with.
During the course of war or the movement of troops, any damage to the standing crops was severely dealt
with. The soldiers had to dismount from their horses while passing through the villages and the pathways
leading to the corn fields. Punjab peasantry, suppressed for centuries, was put on the road to prosperity, and
given a new dispensation. Gardnetr’s observations about the Khalsa Sarkar are noteworthy : “The Maharaja
was indeed one of those master minds, which only require opportunity to change the face of the Punjab. The
Punjab was not the same, semi starving, terrified, looted by the rulers, and poorly clothed during his reign. It
was a prosperous, homogeneous and peaceful state with all the communities, Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs,
fully satisfied partners in the Government, in military and civil administration, and it was the happiest State
communally in Asia. The Maharaja visited the Hindu, Sikh and Muslim places of pilgrimage. It was the only
state in India, which was the most prosperous, the most flourishing and the most contented.’
The administration of justice under Ranjit Singh was, by the standards of the times, simple, well-
organised and suited to the needs of the people. In villages, the disputes were settled by the arbitration of
Panchayats, who had to decide cases according to the custom prevailing in each locality. In the towns the
function was entrusted to the Kardars, Nazims or sometimes to officials called Adalis (judges). An Adalt-i-Ala
or High Court was set up at the capital. Above them all was the Maharaja himself to hear appeals and
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
petitions made against the decisions of the above mentioned authorities. He was in the habit of receiving
petitions and listening to complaints even during the course of passing through the streets. Decisions were
speedy and justice was quick. With the Maharaja justice was a passion. He believed that the only divine
element in kingship was justice. He sent instructions to the Chief Kotwal of Lahore that he should not spare
the Maharaja himself or any member of his family, should they be found guilty of any offence. It was a unique
instance where the king had accepted equality with his subjects. A protector of the poor and the weak, the
Maharaja established a state where the strong were just and the weak secure.
Though cruelty, killings, injustice and oppression practised and the wars fought in the current century
have raised a serious question mark in the minds of many thinking persons about the form of government
best suited for a people, many persons conditioned by the western education are still sold to the ideal of a
democratic structure of government being the best to secure justice among the people. On the other hand,
the concept of kingship at once raises the idea of despotic and unjust rule. It is, perhaps, in this context that
Fakir Syed Waheduddin has quoted two orders of Ranjit Singh to ensure justice among the people and the
application of secular laws of each community to its members through courts presided over by persons of the
community concerned. These orders emphasize two things. First, that equality before the law and equity in
administration were the fundamental criteria of Ranjit Singh’s administration. Second, that because of the
actual humane manner in which justice was administered, it was never felt necessary by him to give the
extreme punishment of death so as to secure respect for the law. And, in this respect, he ensured the sanctity
of this principle by not punishing with death even those who had attempted to kill him. We give below the
two orders issued by Ranjit Singh.
I. “Sincere Well-wisher, Fakir Nuruddin Ji, May you be happy.
It is hereby decreed by His Highness with the utmost emphasis that no person in the city should practise high-
handedness and oppression on the people. Indeed, if even His Highness himself should issue an inappropriate order against any
resident of Lahore, it should be clearly brought to the notice of His Highness so that it may be amended. Protector of Bravery,
Matva Singh should abvays be advised to dispense justice in accordance with legitimate right and without the shghtest oppression
and, furthermore, he should be advised to pass orders in consultation with the Panches and Judges of the city and in accordance
with the Shastras and the Quran, as pertinent to the faith of the parties; for such is our pleasure. And should any person fail to
act in accordance with your advice or instructions, you should send him a formal letter so that it may serve as a proof on the
strength of which His Highness may punish him for disobedience.
Despatched from the Court of For repairs to the old ditch an
His Highness. expenditure of two thousand
31 Bhadon, 1882 Sambat Rupees is hereby sanctioned.
For the present the salary of Fakir Sahib, Rs.1500/-. After expenditure on the said ditch, the salary of
Sher Dyal, Rs. 500/ -’®°
IL. “Ujjal Didar Nirmal Budb Sardar Amir Singh Ji and our sincere well-wisher, Fakir Nuruddin Ji, May you live
long by the grace of Sri Akal Purakh and enjoy the protection of Sri Akal Budb.
By the grace of Sri Sat Guruji, the exalted command is issued to you that, deeming yourselves to be responsible for the
security of Lahore, you should take care of the duties pertaining thereto. Sri Sat Guruji forbid, if His Highness, his beloved son
Kharak Singh Ji, Kanwar Sher Singh Ji, the Raja Kalan Bahadur, Raja Suchet Singh Ji, or Jamadar Ji should commit any
inappropriate act, you should bring it to the notice of His Highness. Secondly, you should send your trusted representative to the
Sardars with instructions to refrain from committing inappropriate acts. If the Sardars act according to your instruction, well and
good; otherwise, you should send word to them that you will bring the matter to the notice of His Highness. Moreover, you should
not permit forcible possession to be taken of any person’s land or any person’s house to be demolished. Nor should you allow any
high-handedness to be practised upon woodcutters, fodder-vendors, oil-vendors, horse-shoers, factory owners, etc. In such case also
you should prevent the oppressor from oppression. You should administer matters in the same way as Sardar Desa Singh Ji,
should not permit anybody to be treated harshly and should forward to His Highness any petitions intended for him.
Furthermore, you should daily send for Chand Mall, Kotwal of the Royal Court, and Babu Panda, and obtain from them news
of all happenings so that every person’s rights are secured and no person is oppressed. The frames of the city gates should be
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
caused to be repaired from the revenue of the Court. Hazara Sawars should be appointed to watch the roads and, considering the
security of the whole of Lahore city as your responsibility, you should act in accordance with this decree.
Dated Lahore, 19 Pos, 1888 Sambat.”6
Waheeduddin concludes that these orders are “unique in one respect : they throw overboard the
time-honoured legal fiction upon which the fact of kingship is based — that the king can do no wrong. It
was characteristic of Ranjit Singh to acknowledge that, both as a man and as a king, he was fallible and to
provide against any possible adverse effects of his fallibility upon the rights and well-being of his people.’
Students of history are well aware of the presence of racial, religious and ethnic discrimination and
even riots in modern states, as also of the need for the use of drastic force to maintain law and order. In this
context, three things are important and speak for themselves. First, Ranjit Singh never tried to convert
Muslims or Hindus to Sikhism, even though his community remained a permanent minority in the State.
Second, there were hardly any communal riots in his times. This background and the actual administration of
justice and equality was so impressive and evident to the people, that respect for law was spontaneous, and he
never had to use strong or brutal measures to maintain or enforce the law.
Third, the cases of bribery and corruption in his kingdom were rare. The Maharaja’s frequent and
unexpected tours kept the local officials in check. While crime had been rampant under his immediate
predecessors, it was reduced practically to the point of abolition during his reign. The cases of theft and
highway robberies were uncommon. George Keene, an observer of the Punjab scene during the Maharaja’s
regime stated : “In hundreds and in thousands the orderly crowds stream on. Not a bough is broken from a
way side tree, not a rude remark addressed to the traveller as he treads his horse’s way.”°* As a result many
people from the Cis-Satluj states migrated to the Maharaja’s territories, where there was more security for life
and property, where their rights and privileges were better protected. The Maharaja provided to his subjects
all the fundamental rights and basic freedoms supposed to be enshrined in any modern constitution of today.
Ranjit Singh was an enlightened ruler. He trained his armies on modern lines through his European
Generals like Allard, Ventura and Avitabile. A trained and disciplined army was the principal instrument that
had led to western supremacy over the east in the seventeeth and eighteenth centuries. Among Indian
princes, Ranjit Singh was the first to train his army to a level at par with western armies. It was this training
and discipline coupled with the Sikh ethos that his armies even in his absence, and though betrayed by its
Generals, proved a match for the British. So much so that, though vanquished, it commanded the unstinted
ptaise of its opponents like General Gough. The Maharaja had a remarkable capacity for inspiring loyalty
among the soldiers, who were imbued with national sentiments. They showed pride in their profession and
valour, faith and righteousness, in their cause and conduct. This made them fight like brave soldiers against
the British, even after the Maharaja’s death. Empire builders have often used the army as an instrument of
State policy. The invariable result in all such cases is disintegration in the ranks of the army after the ruler’s
death. But Ranjit Singh’s army undertook the responsibility of defending Punjab from the British
encroachment in accordance with the Khalsa tradition. They could not save the Sikh State, but even in their
defeat won applause and admiration of their friends and foes. The poet Shah Muhammad in his Jangnamab
extols the virtues of the Khalsa soldiers in the Anglo-Sikh Wars.
Though himself unlettered, the Maharaja knew the importance of education. The Gurus had bade
their followers to be progressive in theit outlook, always to be Sikhs or learners, to take increasing advantage
of opportunities to improve their condition and knowledge as men free from the shackles of earlier
prejudices, conventions and dogmas and the stranglehold of the priestly class who claimed monopoly of
knowledge. The Maharaja was very liberal and impartial in the matter of making endowments for education.
There were about four thousand schools belonging to different communities scattered over the length and
breadth of his kingdom, with about one “Akh and twenty thousand students. These schools were mostly
attached to gurdwaras, mosques and temples. The Maharaja was most generous in helping the custodians of
these places of learning. He also stood for modern knowledge and is said to have encouraged the learning of
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
English and French. He also procured the services of a Christian missonary to set up English medium
schools at Lahore, though without allowing him to propagate Christianity or introduce Bible lessons in the
curriculum of the schools. Maharaja Ranjit Singh’s department of Charity cost the State exchequer one tenth
of the total revenues amounting nearly to twenty kh Rupees a year. This is an extremely important fact of
Ranjit Singh’s administration that highlights its Sikh character. The Fifth Master had prescribed for the Sikh a
contribution of Daswandb or one tenth of his earnings towards a charitable fund of the Society. It is indeed
outstanding of Ranjit Singh’s administration that he ear-marked one tenth of the total revenue towards
expenditure on charities and other public causes.
RANJIT SINGH’S PLACE IN HISTORY
The Maharaja gave to his citizens a consistent and uniform system of administration and a greater
amount of peace and prosperity than they had enjoyed for over a century. The Mughal and the Maratha
tulers in the country had been marked by bigotry, corruption, degradation, persecution, treachery, confusion,
disorder, extravagance and pomp. Ranjit Singh’s claim to greatness lies in the fact that he successfully faced
the historical challenge of abuse of power and religious bigotry by restoring communal harmony in his State.
He endowed politics with a moral purpose. His State was governed and sustained by values and attitudes that
characterised the Sikh tradition. The Gurus had envisioned an egalitarian social order based on justice and
freedom. With the Sikh ethos governing his psyche, Ranjit Singh translated this vision into practice.
For the first time in Indian history a landmark was created. Mazhabhis, the centuries old
untouchables of the Hindu society, far from being discriminated against, became a regular component of
Ranjit Singh’s army. The Hindu hill Rajputs, who had refused to co-operate with the Tenth Master on
account of his giving equality to the lower castes ceased to have any compunction in working and fighting
side by side with them. And his greatest achievement was the unstinted and uncommon loyalty he
commanded from all sections of his men, whether Muslim, Hindu, Sikh, Rajput or European. The miracle
was that a sense of comradeship was achieved just in a period of four decades, most of which time was spent
in fighting and consolidation. Unlike the Muslim invaders or contemporary rulers of his times, another
uncommon feature of his rule was that while he spent long periods in fighting far away from his capital, there
never was a local uprising to challenge his authority. This indicates an incontrovertible belief and assessment
of the people he ruled that he was not fighting for any personal aggrandisement nor was he or his armies out
for gathering any booty or loot.
CONCLUSION
From our narration of facts about the rule of Ranjit Singh it is evident that in all aspects of its
functioning and administration, Ranjit Singh’s rule was in sharp contrast to the rule, not only of his
contemporaries, but also of many modern secular administrations. Moses and Mohammed were both
spiritual and political leaders. Moses was followed by kings, David and Solomon, well-known for their
fairness and wisdom. Similarly, the Muslim rule in Europe, in contrast with the ghetto, repeated massacres
and pogroms perpetrated by Christian monarchs, was remarkably tolerant, mild and humane towards its non-
Muslim subjects. It is the lesson of history that a healthy combination of religion and politics is bound to lead
to a harmonious socio-political order. It is well-known that Ashoka’s rule, coloured by Buddhist ethics, was a
shining light among the Empires of the earlier millenia. Even among modern secular rulers at least two of the
despots ate notorious for their inhumanity. We refer to Hitler’s elimination of six million Jews and Stalin’s
liquidation of his twelve million countrymen in order to make their people safe and secure for peace,
prosperity and equality. Hence, the inevitable conclusion that Ranjit Singh’s rule, being a product of the Sikh
tradition and ethos, was outstandingly humane, liberal and tolerant towards his people, including his erstwhile
opponents and enemies. His rule was, undoubtedly, benign and fair, and why it was so, is explained by the
background of the whole-life religious thesis and ethos which conditioned and influenced it, and of which
Ranjit Singh was a shining product.
Ranjit Singh’s rule epitomises and demonstrates a very important principle of religion and human
history, namely, the comparative role and impact of dichotomous or pacificist religions and of whole-life or
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
miri-piri religion, on the life of man. So far as the Indian contemporary life was governed by dichotomous
Hinduism, there was little doubt that the discriminatory system of caste, pollution and untouchability, and the
dominance of the upper castes remained a fact of life in the Indian society, including the times of Shivaji. At
no time could the untouchables think of working shoulder to shoulder with the upper castes. The position in
the matter of social discrimination was no different in the rule of Christian monarchs up to the nineteenth
century, where the ghetto for the Jews remained a cursed institution, and the treatment of Muslim subjects
was no less discriminatory. Arnold Toynbee finds himself caught in a web of self-contradiction, and perhaps
bias as well, when, on the one hand, he condemns the diversion of religion to empirical and mundane tasks
and seeks to justify and extol the pacificism and other-worldliness of the Christian mission, and, for that
matter, condemns the miri-piri or the whole-life character of Islam; and, on the other hand, he is constrained
to concede that “by contrast with the treatment of subject Jews and Muslims in the Christiandom, the
treatment of subject ‘People of the Book’ in Dar-Ul-Islam has been honourably distinguished by its
comparative tolerance.’ This shows that it is a whole-life or a miri-piri system that alone is capable of
fostering a harmonious progress and development of man and society. Consequently, dichotomous or
pacificist religions to the extent they keep confined to what Toynbee calls their spiritual mission (as divorced
from a whole-life mission), remain historically and socially barren in their influence and impact. The
phenomenon of Ranjit Singh is not just a rule of a monarch. It demonstrates very clearly the role and impact
of a whole-life or miri-piri religion on the society of its times.
REFERENCES
Cunningham, J.D. : History of the Sikhs (Reprint, New Delhi, 1966), p. 120.
Kohli, Sita Ram : The Organisation of Ranjit Singh’s Army; Maharaja Ranjit Singh (ed.) Teja
Singh and Ganda Singh (Reprint, Patiala, 1970), pp. 60-61.
3. Prinsep, H.T. : Origin of The Sikh Power in The Punjab and Political Life of Maharaja Ranjit
Singh (Reprint, Patiala, 1970), pp. 142-43.
aS
4. Sinha, N.K. : Ranjit Singh (Reprint, Calcutta), pp. 189-92.
5: Bentely, Eric : Century of Hero-Worship (Boston, 1957), pp. 3-8.
6. Macaulay, J.B. : Lord Macaulay’s Legislative Minutes (London, 1946), pp. 2-3.
7. Toynbee, J. Arnold :_A Study of History (Oxford, 1951), p.79.
8. Griffin, Lepel : Ranjit Singh (Reprint, Delhi, 1967), p. 39.
9. “You wear necklaces, put sacrificial marks on your foreheads, carry two dhotis, and put
towels on your heads; If you know God’s designs, you would know that yours is verily a
vain religion :” Macauliffe, M.A. : The Sikh Refigion, Vol. I (Delhi, 1963), p. 237.
“The Qazi telleth lies and eateth filth. The Brahmin taketh life and then batheth. The
ignorant jogi knoweth not the way of union with God. The whole three ruin the world.”
Macauliffe, M.A. : Ibid., p. 338.
10. Dhillon, GS. : Researches in Sikh Religion and History (Chandigarh 1989); p. 2.
11. “Nanak, the Formless One is without fear; All the Rams dust; How many stories there
are of Krishna! How many Veds and religious compositions! Afflicted are Brahma,
Vishnu and Shiva : Yea, afflicted is the whole world.” Guru Granth Sahib, p.1153, Trans.
by Gopal Singh, Vol. IV, p. 1102.
12. “OQ Whom shall we call good or evil, When all creatures belong to Thee.”Guru Granth
Sahib, p. 383.
13. “God is self-existent; so is His Name; Beside Himself He made Nature, wherein He has
His seat and looks on with fondness.” Asa-di-Var, Trans. Teja Singh; Essays in Sikhism
(Lahore, 1944), p.17.
14. “Householders and hermits are equal, whoever calls on the name of the Lord.” Asa
Ragni, 'Trans., Cunningham : op.cit., p. 334.
15. “O Hindus, how shall the stone which itself sinketh carry you across ?” Macauliffe,
VoLL., p. 326.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
Guru Granth Sahib, p. 1046.
Ibid., p. 463.
Dhillon, G:S. : op.cit., p. 9.
Irvine, William : Later Mughals (Reprint, New Delhi, 1971), pp. 317-18.
Archer, John Clark : S7Rds (Princeton, 1946), p. 232.
Forster, George : A Journey from Bengal to England, Vol. I (Reprint, Patiala, 1970), p. 340.
‘3pdy jwp gurU dy pUry, rihMdy siqgurU pws hjUry [
kyswDwrl suMdr sUry, kIqI tihl pelI mnjUry [
bKsI irDisD BrpUry, KyqI krn hMFwvn qUry [
Ab isrdwr hy [*
Bir Singh : Bara Maha Guru Gobind Singh Ji Ka (ed.) Piara Singh Padam (Patiala, 1959), p.
143.
Waheeduddin, Fakir Syed : The Real Ranjit Singh (Karachi, 1965), p. 57.
Ibid., Intorduction, pp. 7-8.
Hugel, Baron Charles : Travels in Kashmir and Punjab (Reprint, Patiala, 1970), p. 382.
Murray (Captain) : History of The Punjab, Vol. I. (Reprint, Patiala, 1970), p. 175.
Henry, T. Prinsep : Origin of The Sikh Power in the Punjab (Reprint, Patiala, 1970), p. 148.
Dhillon, G:S. : op.cit., pp. 2-3.
Waheeduddin : op.cit., p. 57.
Sarkar, S.C. and Datta, K.K., Modern Indian History (Allahabad, 1957), p. 180.
Segal, Ronald : The Crisis of India (Bombay, 1968), p. 79.
Macrindle, J.W. : Ancient India As Described by Magasthenes and Arian (Calcutta, 1926), p.
214;
Al-Bairuni, Al-Hind (Punjabi Trans. Yog Dhyan Ahuja) (Patiala, 1970), p. 362; Elliot and
Dowson : History of India as Told by its Own Historians, Vol. I (Allahabad, 1969), p.184.
Ibid.
Elliot, Charles, Hinduism and Buddbism, Vol. 1 (Reprint London, 1962), p. 211. Joshi,
L.M. : Studies in the Buddhistic Culture in India, (Delhi, 1967 L, pp. 395-403.
Ibid.
Parkash, Buddha: Aspects of Indian History and Culture (Agra, 1965), p. 215.
Qanungo, S.N. : Decline and Fall of The Maratha Power in Majumdar, R.C. (ed.) The History
and Culture of The Indian People: The Maratha Supremacy (Bombay, 1971), pp. 515-16.
Hans, Surjit, “The Gurbilas in The Early Nineteenth Century’ in the Journal of Regional
History, Vol. II, 1981, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, p. 56.
“The position was further complicated by the minority status of the rulers. Thus the
bonds with the Hindu constituency had to be strengthened. The Muslim population had
to be pacified not only administratively but also doctrinally.” Ibid.
Obsorne, W.G. : The Court and Camp of Runjeet Singh (London, 1840), pp. 94-95.
Hugel, Baron Charles, op.cz., pp. 292-93.
Cunningham, J.D.: op.ci., pp. 48.
Ibid., p. 70.
Bhangu, Rattan Singh, Prachin Panth Parkash (ed.) Bhai Vir Singh (Amritsar, 1962), pp.
291-96.
Cunningham, J.D., op.cit., p. 92.
“He (Ranjit Singh) raised the alien hill Dogras, Dhyan Singh, Khushal Singh and Gulab
Singh, almost from the gutter to positions of supreme authority in the civil apparatus of
his government, and Tej Singh, an insignificant Brahmin of the Gangetic-Doab and Lal
Singh another Brahmin from Gandhara valley, were granted such influence which
eventually raised them to the supreme command of the Sikh Army, and thus he dug his
own grave, the grave of his descendents, and paved the way to the eventual enslavement
of the Sikh people.” Kapur Singh, Parasaraprasana (ed.)
Madanjit Kaur and Piar Singh (Amritsar 1989), p. 239.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
47, Teja Singh, op.cit, p.103.
48. Sinha, N.K : op.cit., p. 149.
49. Khullar, KK : Maharaja Ranjit Singh (New Delhi, 1980), p.185.
50. Lawrence, H.M.L. : Adventures of an Officer in Punjab, Vol. I (Reprint, Patiala, 1970), pp.
30-31.
51. Griffin, Lepel: Ranjit Singh (Reprint, Delhi, 1970), pp. 98-99.
52. Sen, S.N. : “Marathas and North Indian States in Majumdar, R.C. (ed.), The History And
Culture of The Indian People: The Maratha Supremacy, Vol. WI (Bombay, 1977), p. 419.
53. Hunter, W.W.: The Marquess of Dalhousie (Oxford, 1895), p. 99;
Yadav, Kirpal Chandra, ‘British Policy Towards Sikhs, 1849-57 in Harbans Singh and
Barrier; N. Gerald (ed.), Essays In Honour of Dr Ganda Singh (Patiala, 1976), pp. 189-91;
Khushwant Singh :_A History of The Sikhs, Vol. 2; 1839-1964 (Delhi, 1977), pp. 94-95.
54. Segal, Ronald, op.aiz. p. 80.
55. Datta, K.K., Destruction of The Mughal Empire in Majumdar, R.C. (ed.), The History And
Culture of The Indian People, Vol.VUI (Bombay, 1977), pp. 117-18, 352-53.
56. Parekh, Manilar C., Christian Proselytism In India (Bombay, 1947), pp. 12, 20, 36-37;
Report of the Christian Missionary Activities Inquiry Committee, Madhya Pradesh,
1956, p. 66, Quoted by Patel, Baburao : Footprints of Christ (Bombay, 1979), pp. 4-5.
57. Ibid.
58. Guru Granth Sahib, p. 74.
59. Murray (Captain), op.cit., p. 174.
59-a. Nehru, Jawaharlal : The Discovery of India (New Delhi, 1964), p. 298.
60. Guru Granth Sahib, p. 85.
61. Chopra, G.L. : The Punjab As a Sovereign State (Hushiarpur, 1960), p. 137.
62. Banga, Indu: Agrarian Systems of The Sikhs (New Delhi, 1978), pp. 63-64.
63. Sinha, N.K., op.cit, p. 142.
64. Banga, Indu, of.cit., p. 191.
64a. Quoted in Diwan Singh’s : The Revolution of Guru Nanak (Chandigarh, 1993), p. 227.
65. Waheeduddin : op.cit., pp. 31-33.
66. Ibid.
67. Ibid.
68. George Keene, quoted by Khullar, K.K., op.cit., p. 198.
69. Toynbee, Arnold : An Historian’s Approach To Rehigion (London, 1956), p. 90.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
28
ANGLO-SIKH WARS
KARNAIL SINGH
During the six thousand years of recorded history, there has been a war every third year.! There were
short and long wats, community and religious wars, inter-state and world wars. While some of these wars
were for loot, arson and mere aggrandizement, others were for establishing political and economic hegemony
and building empires. Also, there were peaceful crusades involving persistent and monumental efforts and
unique sacrifices for general uplift of the suffering humanity, which left their imperishable impact in the area
of their happening. The Sikhs have had to go through both these types of human struggles again and again
throughout their brief span of life of five hundred years, for the Sikh Gurus had established a religion which
was to meet spiritual and temporal needs of the people everywhere and for all times. Such a religion had had
Godly sanction.”
It is well-known that during a near century of warfare by the British in India from Plassey (1757) to
Chillianwala (1849), they had met the most formidable resistance during the Sikh Wars. At Ferozeshah, at the
failure of their attack, while retiring upon Ferozepur, they were destroying state papers and contemplating
measures for unconditional surrender to save the wounded, even when the Governor-General Sir Henry
Hardinge and the Commander-in-chief Lord Gough were themselves leading the attack against the Sikhs.> To
fully grasp the background of the Anglo-Sikh Wars (1845-49) wherein such hard-fought battles took place,
we will have to peruse brief history of Sikh religion and its people.
SIKH RELIGION AND ITS PEOPLE
The most important centre of spiritual regeneration in Asia has always been India. It is here that the
teachings of Buddha profoundly influenced the culture of the whole of eastern Asia. About two thousand
years thereafter, was born yet another great mystic, Guru Nanak (1469), when Hindu society was rife with
caste and ritualism, and the ruling Muslim community deviating from the essence of religion, practised
fanaticism and tyranny of forcibly imposing their faith on others. Guru Nanak established a revealed religion
based on principles of equality still unknown in the West. Its spiritual tenets are suitable for all mankind
under all circumstances of modern life. He declared the common fatherhood of God and brotherhood of
man. For the first time, he brought about equality between man and woman. He bitterly attacked the
fundamentals of Hinduism such as caste, idol-worship, ritualism and asceticism. He welded the spiritual and
temporal life of people into a harmonious whole.
His concern for the material world was as great as his pre-occupation with the spiritual one. He also
laid down not to practise compromise with tyranny, whether from state or individual. Unlike the Hindus who
chanted Vedic sha/okas in Sanskrit, the Sikhs were to recite religious hymns composed by the Gurus in their
spoken language. He brought about a far-reaching transformation among the people through the institution
of shabad, sangat and pangat. Remembering God, earning of livelihood through honest and hard work, sharing
income with the needy, and service of humanity were the cardinal principles of this new religion. He also
forbade the use of intoxicants of all kinds. Little wonder then, that this new practical religion caught the
imagination of the suppressed masses. With Guru Nanak’s and his three successor Gurus’ extreme exertions
and preachings, it spread far and wide even beyond India. This excited religious jealousy and political
suspicion in Emperor Jehangir, who ordered the fifth guru’s, Guru Arjun’s execution. This martyrdom
(1606) changed the course of Indian history. His son and successor, the sixth guru, Guru Hargobind, girded
up his loins to face the state onslaught and fought four successful battles against the state forces, thus
infusing confidence among the Sikhs that they could themselves challenge the state fanaticism and injustice,
religious or cultural. When Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb (1658-1707) resolved to turn Dar-ul-Harb (Hindu
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
India) into Dar-ul-Islam (Muslim State) by force*, the ninth Sikh guru, Guru Tegh Bahadur, offered himself
for martyrdom (1675) to save the Hindu religion, in which he himself did not believe. When this unique
sacrifice failed to bring about change in the state policy of forcibly converting Hindus, the tenth guru, Guru
Gobind Singh, in keeping with the basic Sikh tenets of fighting oppression, himself fought sixteen battles
against state forces and created a class of self-sacrificing saint-soldiers, who during the dark century of
Mughal and Afghan onslaughts (1658-1764) struck again and again against the citadel of state fanaticism, until
they established a benevolent political hegemony in the areas between the rivers Sindh and Ganges (1765-99).
Besides, during this period, these early freedom fighting pioneers inflicted exemplary punishments on all
those who had robbed and oppressed the masses during the last century, and also established a benign and
righteous regime.
For this purpose, they crossed the river Yamuna seventeen times, thus bringing home to the people
in northern India the true essence of Sikh religious principles of fighting and punishing the tyrants. Then
appeared on the political scene the legendary Maharaja Ranjit Singh (1799-1839), who with amazing
astuteness, established an era of peace, prosperity and dignity much beyond the borders of Punjab as far away
as Sind, Kashmir, Ladakh, Baltistan and Tibet. Donovan Williams, Prof. of South Asian and African History,
University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada, records, “There is room for toying with the idea that this great leader
(Maharaja Ranjit Singh) was born too late in the history of India to realise his full potential. Who knows what
that history would have been if fate had presented him with an earlier opportunity to carve out an empire
which conceivably might have delayed the British advance.” (Prof. Bikramajit Husrat, Life and Times of Ranjit
Singh, V.V.R.I. Press, Hoshiarpur, 1977, p. VI). There had been seventy one foreign invasions of India by
then, which had bled people white physically, religiously and socially.> Sikh domination in the region dispelled
the shadow of persistent Afghan menace of rape, loot and arson for all time to come. But, this happy state of
affairs could be brought about only after this young nation had sacrificed two hundred thousand of its
religiously soaked freedom fighters in defending dharma and honour of its people. It was thus, that the
Punjab and its people were described as, “The country on the line of invasion — the people — a race
nurtured in storm.”° Prof. Stanley Wolpert, the California University expert on South Asia, describes Sikh
power of those days thus : “Maharaja Ranjit Singh’s standing army of the pure (Khalsa) numbered nearly a
hundred thousand Sikhs, a mighty force forged in the fires of Mughal oppression, tempered with constant
conflict with Afghans and welded into a weapon of righteous action by their faith in the scripture left to them
by their ten Gurus. Thus by 1820, his kingdom embraced a quarter million square miles of south east Asia’s
richest and strategically the most significant domain.” It was such a Sikh military force which the British had
to contend with in extending their power to the north west of India. But before we describe the actual
fortunes of Anglo-Sikh wars, we may briefly explain the origin and manner of expansion of the British power
vis-a-vis the Indian political scene of those days.
INDIA DURING MID-NINETEENTH CENTURY
Nadir Shah’s invasion of India in 1739 greatly damaged the already weakened Mughal empire.
Thereafter, Abdali’s nine further onslaughts (1748-69) crippled what was left of this once magnificent
kingdom. Abdali had also humbled the Mahrattas at Panipat in 1761, where one hundred thousand of their
soldiers fell. As a result, several local chieftains formed independent principalities throughout India, but
accepted one after another the British hegemony between the years 1757-1849, sometimes because of
mistule, occasionally through the jealousy of a neighbouring chief, often as a result of British greed for
expansion, but always accompanied by shameless treachery and intrigues by the British.
ADVENT OF THE BRITISH IN INDIA
The British under Capt. Hawkins came to India in 1608 as a trading Company. He brought presents
of 25,000 gold coins from King James I for Emperor Jehangir and obtained some trade concessions at Surat
(Gujarat). In 1639, a site in Madras was granted to another Englishman, Mr. Day, where they built Fort St.
George. In 1690, they acquired a swampy area in Bengal, founded Calcutta and built Fort William. In 1757,
Clive defeated Siraj-ud-Daula, Nawab of Bengal, with the help of traitor Mir Jafir and after putting him on
the throne extracted heavy political and financial price from him. After three years, the British deposed Mir
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Jafir with the help of his son-in-law Mir Kasim, whom they put on the throne and again received further
concessions for the Company and gifts for its employees. Besides, Kasim had undertaken, through a treaty,
to pay £ 1,02,000 to the members of Calcutta council alone in addition to five hundred thousand Rupees for
the Karnatic wars. When Kasim tried to improve the state administration and check the Company and its
servants from illegal private trade, the British went to war with him. Even before Kasim could be worsted in
battle, the British again declared Mir Jafir as the future Nawab of Bengal, who again offered free trade to the
Company and its servants in addition to other financial advantages and gifts. This pattern of encouraging
traitors and of putting one Indian chief against the other, and obtaining political and private benefits, went on
unabated till the end of the eighteenth century. Later, Lord Macaulay was to record this disgraceful plunder,
“Such parts of India as were under the Company were subjected to a land tax of 50% of the produce and to
other requisitions so numerous and severe that two thirds of population fled, while others sold their children
to meet the rising rates. Enormous fortunes were rapidly accumulated at Calcutta, while thirty millions of
human beings (in Bengal, Bihar and Orissa) were reduced to the last extremity of wretchedness. They had
been accustomed to live under tryanny, but not under tryanny like this.”? With the fall of Shujah-ud-Daula of
Oudh in 1764, the Mughal Emperor, Shah Alam H, became a suppliant of the British camp. Under the
fiction of grant of “Diwanr from the Emperor in 1765, the British became a territorial power, and began to
play a more active part in the Mysore, the Maharatta and Ruhela wars, always employing the usual tactics of
deceit and betrayal along with the force of arms. By the turn of the century, they had virtually replaced the
great Mughals, and their political policies thereafter were dictated by their desire for further expansion and
consolidation.
BRITISH POLICY TOWARDS SIKHS WHEN THEIR HELP WAS NEEDED
There were rumours of yet another Afghan march on India in 1771, when General Robert of the
Company’s service wrote to Sardar Jhanda Singh Bhangi and another Sikh Sardar, “That he (Abdali) cannot
cross the Attock for fear of the Khalsa Army’, adding, “It is clear that as long as the Khalsa army is on the
watch, no one can march on Hindustan unopposed.” The fear of Afghan invasion in the closing years of the
eighteenth century and political designs of Napoleon on India in the beginning of the nineteenth century,
drove the British to enter into a treaty of friendship with Ranjit Singh in 1806. Upto 1805, the British had
decided to keep their western boundary at river Yamuna. But, with the signing of the Peace Treaty of Tilsit in
1807 between Nepoleon and Russia and their intended march on India, the British decided to extend their
boundary to river Sutlej. Accordingly, the British, through prolonged and persistent negotiations, cajoled and
even coerced Ranjit Singh into signing the treaty of Amritsar in 1809, fixing river Sutlej as the boundary
between the two states. Having once signed the treaty, the Sikhs faithfully observed its terms.
J.D.Cunningham records, “To one friendship the Maharaja remained ever constant, from one alliance he
never sought to shake himself free. This was the friendly alliance with the British.”!' At times, there were
temptations too alluring to be resisted when the British suffered reverses in their campaigns for expansion.
Also, there were provocations from the British side of political interference in his affairs which were too great
to be tolerated. For instance, in the early stages of the Nepal War (1816-18), the British suffered some
military setbacks, when, with the death of British General Gillespie, the myth of their invincibility was
broken. During the first Burmese War (1824-26), British soldiers suffered heavily in the jungles of Burma.
In 1820, the Bhonsla raja of Nagpur appealed to Ranjit Singh for help. Four years later, Nepal government
sought his co-operation in a defensive alliance. Next year, the Maharaja of Bharatpur asked for his help, but
Ranjit Singh never wavered and remained firm to his plighted word of friendship. On the other hand, the
British did not abide by the terms of the treaty of Amritsar. To them, friendship was only a matter of
expediency. When engaged in consolidating their power in Hindustan, they kept up the facade of friendship
with the Sikhs. But, as soon as they found themselves secure in their possessions and none to oppose their
might there, they turned their attention to the north of the Sutlej, nay, even beyond the Indus.
BRITISH HOSTILITY TOWARDS SIKHS
Hari Ram Gupta records, “In the twenties of the nineteenth century, the British Government of
India was planning expansion both to the east and the north-west. From their capital at Calcutta, they
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
conquered lower Burma in 1825, and began penetration into China, resulting in the declaration of the Opium
War in 1839, and the occupation of Hong Kong in 1842.”
“For the extension of the British Empire in the north-west, a second capital was established at
Shimla in 1828. In October 1831, Lord William Bentinck, Governor-General of India, met Ranjit Singh at
Ropar to obtain first-hand knowledge of Ranjit Singh, his successor and the court, and to deceive the great
Maharaja over Sind. The general impression left on his mind was that in a decade or so, the Sikh state after
Ranjit Singh would fall into their hands like a ripe mango with a slight stroke. On the very field of the cloth
of gold at Ropar, William Bentinck decided to build supremacy over Punjab, Sind, Afghanistan, Turkistan and
Khorasan up to the borders of Russia. Punjab was entrusted to Wade with a Hindu spy at Lahore, Sind to
Pottinger with Maulvi Azam-ud-din Husain, Kabul to Masson, Munshi Karamat Ali at King Kamran’s court
at Herat, and Alexander Burnes to study the situation at Bokhara.”
He adds, “As planned by Wily Wade, his agents immediately started surveying every inch of the Sikh
kingdom up to Gilgit, Kashmir, Ladakh, trans-Indus and Bahawalpur and to win over Muslim masses by
portraying the attractive picture of British justice and fairplay.”’!* “But in order to cover up the evil design to
dismember a friendly kingdom with whom it had a treaty of friendship since 1809, Lord Ellenborough,
President of the Board of Control of East India Company, sent a dispatch to Bombay in 1830 enclosing a
personal letter of compliment for Maharaja Ranjit Singh together with a batch of horses to be forwarded to
Lahore, under the charge of a British officer, as present from the King of England.” Yet on his
appointment as Governor-General of India in 1842, Lord Ellenborough while still in England was requesting
Duke of Wellington for his opinion as to the general principles upon which a campaign against the Punjab
should be conducted.
In 1826, Sayyed Ahmed of Bareilly, a British subject raised standard of Jehad in the Pathan area
against the Sikh rule. He collected his funds and recruits mainly from the British Indian territory. He even
obtained written consent of the British government for his anti-Ranjit Singh struggle. The Jebad continued
with full vigour for four and a half years and ended only after the defeat and liquidation of the Sayyed and his
principal deputy, Ismail, in 1831, when the Punjab heaved a sigh of relief. The British could not interfere in
the affairs of Sind, according to the treaty of 1809, being on the north-western side of Sutlej and adjacent to
the Sikh province of Multan. Also, as the Sikhs were the natural successors of Abdali’s possessions of
Punjab, Multan, Peshawar, Derajat and Sind, Ranjit Singh had every right to interfere in the affairs of Sind.
But this was not acceptable to the British, who themselves hastily concluded a commercial treaty of
navigation with the Emirs of Sind in 1832. It was a mere pretext for its future conquest of this province in
1843. Besides, Ranjit Singh was forestalled from occupying Shikar Pur, which was close to the areas already
under his domain. The town of Ferozepur, barely 40 miles from Lahore, was recognized by the British to be
in the sovereignty of Ranjit Singh, but the place being of strategic importance was occupied by the British in
1835, on the death of Sardarni Lachhman Kaur and converted into a cantonment. Such intrigues and
duplicity had shaken Ranjit Singh’s faith in the British. He bluntly expressed his disgust when he told a
Christian missionary, the Rev. Dr Joseph Wolff, “You say you travel for the sake of religion; why then do
you not preach to the English in Hindustan who have no religion at all.” When the missionary tried to divert
the subject from politics to religion and enquired, “How may one come nigh unto God.” The Maharaja
replied with biting sarcasm, “By making an alliance with the British Government as I lately did with the Laard
Nawab Sahib (Governor-General) at Ropar.’’4
With the death of Hari Singh Nalwa in the battle of Jamrod, Dost Mohd Khan saw a ray of hope in
recovering Peshawar from Ranjit Singh through mediation of the British. But when the latter failed to bring
this about inspite of their best efforts, Dost Mohd began to look for greater co-operation with Persia and
Russia. The British made this a pretext for removing him and instead putting the refugee Shah Shujah on the
throne of Kabul, which they did with the help of Sikhs after signing the Tripartite treaty of 1838 among the
British, Maharaja Ranjit Singh and Shah Shujah. But the Afghans were loathe to accept someone brought in
the baggage of a foreign power. Thus, resentment against Shah Shujah exploded into violence in various
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
parts of the country. On November 3,1841, an angry mob surrounded the house of the British envoy at
Kabul and slaughtered every inmate. General Elphinstone lost his nerve and surrendered to Mohd Akbar,
son of fugitive Dost Mohd, with 4,500 troops, including 700 Europeans, and his guns and stores. Leaving at
his mercy the old and the sick, women and children, he made an exit from Kabul on 6th Jan.,1842. The
Afghans fell on the retreating foreigners. Two days later, only 800 were left alive. Hunger, frost and Afghan
bullets accounted for most of the others. Out of the 16,500 men, almost the sole survivor, Dr Brydon,
“fainting from wounds, hunger and exhaustion’, arrived at Jalalabad to tell the tale of disaster.'>
Sit Herbert Edwardes records, “The rash Governor-General who, without even consulting his
Council, had been capable of marching a British army into Afghanistan, 400 miles from the British frontier,
to dethrone a reigning Prince, and set up an exile, was now paralysed at the first rumour of disaster to his
troops, and could with difficulty be brought to move a single regiment to their succour.’ He adds, “The
Commander-in-Chief had been against the policy of Cabul war from the beginning and foretold disaster for a
war carried on without a base, and seemed incapable of drawing the soldier’s sword to succour his
subordinates.””!6
There remained hundred and twenty British prisioners in Kabul; a British garrison at Kandhar under
General Nott; another at Ghazni under Colonel Palmer; one at Kelat-i-Ghilzai under Captain Craigie, and a
fourth at Jalalabad under Robert Sale, but all in desparate need of help. The Khyber route was the shortest,
easiest and safest for a relieving force to take. Sir George Clerk, the British agent at Ludhiana went to Lahore
to request assistance. Maharaja Sher Singh readily agreed to render this in every possible way.
Sit George Clerk despatched four native regiments under Brigadier Wilde for the relief of Jalalabad
and Maharaja Sher Singh sent orders to General Avitabile, Governor of Peshawar, to supply them with a few
pieces of artillary and render any other help which they may require. After obtaining four guns from the
Sikhs, Wilde forced his way through the Khyber Pass when his force was ambushed by the Afghans and
forced to retire to Jamrud with heavy casulties, Wilde himself being among the injured. Thus the first attempt
to relieve Jalalabad failed in January 1842. In the meantime another force under General Pollock was
proceeding to Peshawar to take part in operations. Sir Herbert Edwards records, “Lord Auckland’s last
instructions to Pollock before giving up his disastrous government in February were to “withdraw” the
garrison from Jalalabad, and then do what seemed best to “procure the safe return of our troops and people
detained beyond the Khyber Pass”, whatever that might mean. Four days after this ambiguous order, Lord
Auckland was relieved by Lord Ellenborough, and with him it rested to decide what policy should be
pursued; — whether it were worthier, or even safer, for the English in India to put up with defeat, withdraw
at once from Afghanistan and leave their captive countrymen to their fate; or to turn the whole resources of
the Empire to the retrieval of the national honour, and te-assertion of supremacy in arms.
He adds, “On the 15th of March, Ellenborough pronounced for war. But the tidings of disaster of
Brigadier England at Hykulzye on March 26, in attempting to reinforce General Nott in Kandhar, made him
forthwith the hand that a month ago was clenched to ‘re-establish our military reputation by the infliction of
some signal and decisive blow upon the Afghans’, now scrawled instructions to Nott to withdraw from
Kandhar and to Pollock to withdraw from Jalalabad. Not a word was said about English captives.”
Further, “While the Governor-General was issuing orders to his Generals in Afghanistan to
withdraw; Clerk was submitting opinon to the Government that General Pollock was in a position to judge
how to act impressively upon the Afghan nation for the recovery of our fame.” He adds, “The Sikh
Government proposed now to unite with British in setting up a Vizeer at Kabul to represent them both.’’!”
This position became possible only after the Sikh Government provided a contingent of 15,000 men
against the stipulated 6,000 to take part in the campaign. Also when the stark conspiracy of the British in
corrupting Gulab Singh Dogra and Governor Avitabile, who were ordered by their government to help the
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
British, was completed with the offer of Kashmir to the former and the guaranty to aid the latter to retire
with his vast property through the British territory.
Thus strengthened by the additional force of ten Sikh regiments under General Avitabile, Pollock left
Peshawar on April 5, fighting Afghans throughout the 35 miles long narrow defiles of Khyber Pass reaching
Jalalabad on April 15, and relieved the garrison. According to Sir Herbert Edwards, “Great was the relief to
every Englishman and woman in the country by Pollock forcing of the Khyber and junction with Sale at
Jalalabad, but the political crisis by no means was over. On the contrary, the five long months of April, May,
June, July and August 1842 were probably as critical a period as the British Indian Empire ever passed
through, except the great Mutiny of 1857, for Pollock had repeatedly declared that he would not stay above
the Pass unless his communications could be maintained.”!® The task to keep open the communications to
Jalalabad through the treacherous Pass was left to the Sikh contingent engaged in the campaign.
“Ellenborough had even decided to hand over the valley of Jalalabad to the Sikhs after British withdrawal
from Afghanistan before November 1842.”!°
“The Sikhs were only bound to employ a contingent of 6,000 men, but they did the work with not
less than 15,000,” wrote Henry Lawrence to J. C. Marshman on April 11,1842.2° And in the words of Major
General Sir Herbert Edwards and Merivale, “If at this moment when one British force had been annihilated
at Kabul and two others were beleaguered at Jallalabad and Kandhar, the Sikhs had turned against us, the year
1857 (Mutiny) would have been anticipated in 1842 under circumstances of far greater ageravation.”?!
General Pollock commanding this army felt that the support of the Sikh government was indispensable,
“Firstly, because we wanted all the soldiers we could bring in the field; and secondly, because it was of vital
consequence to show our enemies in Afghanistan that the Sikhs were with us.”? After successful close of the
campaign, when the British flag was replanted at Bala-Hissar Fort in September, 1842 with the active help of
the Sikhs, “Lord Ellenborough was also desirous of an interview with Sher Singh and as gratitude was
uppermost for the time and added a grace even to success, it was proposed to thank the Maharaja in person
for proofs which he had offered of his continued friendship.”
THE BRITISH INGRATITUDE
“But, O ingratitude, thy name was the British Government in India. While a Sikh contingent of
15,000 men was fighting their (British) battles in the blood thirsty defiles of Khyber Pass, the British were
assembling a third army at Ferozepur to keep the Sikhs in check and act if necessary.”*4 Far worse was the
intriguing conduct of some British officers accompanying the Sikh force in this campaign. Sir Herbert
Edwards records, “It occurred to Henry Lawrence that a consideration should be offered to the Rajahs Dhian
Singh and Gulab Singh for their assistance, they alone in the Punjab being now able to give aid. We need
such men as the Rajahs and Avitabile and should bind them to us by the only tie they recognize, self-
interest.” This formed the beginning of all future betrayals in the coming Anglo-Sikh wars three years later.
Even earlier, when the British Commander-in-Chief Sir Henry Fane came to Lahore in March, 1837 to attend
the marriage of Prince Nau Nihal Singh, “He formed an estimate of the force which would be required for
the complete subjugation of Punjab and got prepared by his Quarter-Master-General complete maps which
formed the ground work of all the maps used, when hostilities did at last break out with the Sikhs.’
BRITISH AND DOGRAS PLAN SUBVERSION OF SIKH KINGDOM
“The proposals of Henry Lawrence at Peshawar to entice some Sikh Chiefs and the negotiations of
Sit George Clerk at Lahore served a double purpose of the British. They secured active support of the Sikh
Government for operations in Afghanistan and bound Gulab Singh and Avitabile to their own political
interest in the Punjab. They also drove a wedge between the ruler and his Chiefs. The seeds of division and
dismemberment of the Sikh kingdom were thus sown with the Dogras already dreaming of accession of their
family to the throne of Lahore. This ultimately led to the murder of Maharaja Sher Singh, his son Partap
Singh and Dhian Singh Dogtra on the same day (September 15,1843) at the hands of Sandhanwalia Sardars.”
Sita Ram Kohli records, “Dhian Singh was responsible for a policy whereby the more violent elements in the
army, very often Sikhs, were transferred from important military stations to others, where scope for making
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
trouble was slighter, and of recruiting new men, mostly non-Sikhs, from Jammu and the other Punjab hills.
Between the months of June, 1841 and February, 1842, some six thousand of these hill men were formed into
8 battalions of infantry and 3 units of light artillery. This, very naturally, aroused suspicion of him, both as
disciplinarian and a Dogra.”?’ This version is also supported by Dr Ganda Singh. “This has been confirmed
by the Memoirs of Alexander Gardner, edited by Major Hugh Pears, 1898. Gardner was a confidant of Raja
Dhian Singh, who had given him a wife out of his own house. Through her and living always among the
Dogras, he knew and had heard a great deal about the intrigues then afoot.” According to his Memoirs, pp.
212-13:
‘This dream was that Hira Singh, the heir of their family, or at least the most promising of its rising generation, might
eventually succeed to the throne of Ranjit Singh. Those to be swept away were the male members of the Maharaja’s family, and
all those ministers, advisors and chiefs who would not join the Dogra party ...... Al these murders were brought about directly or
indirectly by the Dogra brothers, Dhian Singh and Gulab Singh, for the eventual aggrandizement of their family in the person of
Hira Singh.’ 8
Hari Ram Gupta says, “The perusal of these news-letters (Abstracts of Intelligence from the Punjab,
Lahore, December, 1843 — October, 1844, about 300 reports in all) discloses a well-laid-out plot to seize the
Sikh Empire on the part of the Jammu Rajahs, in particular by Gulab Singh. During the later years of Ranjit
Singh’s rule, Dhian Singh had been almost a dictatot ...... Was it then too bold an ambition to hope that some
day he (Hira Singh) might rule the Punjab as king; with Dhian Singh, his father as Prime Minister and Chief
Advisor, with one uncle (Suchet Singh) as Commander-in-Chief and the other, Gulab Singh, ruling all the hill
country. Then in firm alliance with the Kabul Amir and the Court of Nepal, the Dogra family might become
the most powerful in India, and found a dynasty for itself. Even after assassination of Dhian Singh, Gulab
Singh wrote to Hira Singh early in February, 1844, that he should declare himself the Maharaja of Punjab,
take Suchet Singh as Prime Minister, Rai Kesri Chand as Commander-in-Chief and appoint Misr Jalla
manager of Jasrota and of the town duties of Lahore and Amritsar. He himself desired to be invested with
more territories including Kashmir, Peshawar, Multan, Dera Ismail Khan and Hazara. Another reference in
these newsletters states that Raja Hira Singh was the king of Punjab.’
General Sir Charles Gough records, “It is probable that the Jammu brothers designed to share the
tule of the whole of Punjab between them, the plan being that Gulab Singh was to acquire the whole of
Jammu, Kashmir and the North East generally; while Dhian Singh rule at Lahore. There was also a third
brother, Suchet Singh.”2°
THE REGIMENTAL PANCHAYATS
It is significant to state that after the death of Maharaja Kharak Singh and Nau Nihal Singh in
November, 1840, and the dispute for the throne between Sher Singh and Chand Kaur having been resolved,
the relation of the army to the state had become wholly altered. By the middle of 1841, according to
Cunningham, “It was no longer the willing instrument of an arbitrary and genial government, but it looked
upon itself, and was regarded by others, as the representative body of the Sikh people, as the Khalsa itself
assembled by tribes for centuries to take its part in public affairs. The efficiency of the Army as a disciplined
force was not much impaired, for a higher feeling possessed the men, and increased alacrity and resolution
supplied the place of exact training. They were sensible of the advantages of systematic union, and they were
proud of their array as the visible body of Gobind’s commonwealth. As a rule, the troops were obedient to
their appointed officers, so far as concerned their ordinary military duties, but the position of a regiment, of a
brigade, of a division, or of the whole army, relative to the executive government of the country, was
determined by a committee called Regimental Panchayat composed of men selected from each battalion, or
each company in consideration of their general character as faithful Sikh soldiers, or from their particular
influence in their native villages.”’>!
An example of how these Regimental Panchayats acted when things went wrong, may be quoted with
advantage. During the period Hira Singh was the minister at Lahore (September 1843 — December 1844)
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
with Misr Jalla as his chief advisor, great harassment was caused to princes Pashaura Singh and Kashmira
Singh (sons of Maharaja Ranjit Singh) besides many other Darbar dignitaries opposed to the Dogtra
hegemony. This roused the Khalsa against the Dogras. Army Panchayats held meetings on 21st — 23rd
March,1844, when Hira Singh’s administration was subjected to a searching examination. They decided,
therefore, that unless Hira Singh conceded certain demands, he must be forced to resign. Four
representatives of these Panchayats appeared before him in the open Darbar, claimed that they had come on
behalf of the Sarbat Khalsa, and conveyed to him the sukam. It said that he must release Jawahar Singh
(brother of Maharani Jindan), remove the guard placed on the house of Misr Beli Ram, set free his relations
and dependents, raise the siege of Sialkot and Kuryanwala, both garrisons of Princes Pashaura Singh and
Kashmira Singh and give an undertaking that the princes will not be ill-treated in future. They also demanded
the surrender of Misr Jalla, Sheikh Imam-ud-Din and Lal Singh. “If he hesitated or refused’, the delegates
added “The order was that Hira Singh himself be seized.”
Again, when Maharani Jindan collected a number of articles of gold and silver to give in charity on
the first day of new month, as was the custom, Misr Jalla questioned her right for such charitable actions. He
is said to have even used abusive language for her. The Maharani thus extremely troubled at heart, appealed
to the Khalsa for protection. Besides this, Hira Singh and Misr Jalla’s actions had greatly offended the Sikh
psyche beyond toleration in more than one way, such as the brutal massacre of the highly venerated Sikh
Saint Bhai Bir Singh and his devoted associates in thousands in May, 1844, when the Saint was reciting the
holy scripture, which brought matters to a speedy climax. Accordingly, some of the Khalsa regiments moved
out of the cantonment to an open space near the fort. Once more, they demanded the surrender of the hated
and wily Jalla. This was refused. Instead, according to Sohan Lal Suri, the court chronicler, “In the early
hours of December 21,1844, Hira Singh and party loaded with cash and jewellery on elephants stealthily left
their residence for Jammu. But hardly had they passed the Taxali Gate, when they were noticed by a
company of Sikh soldiers.” The news was flashed to the military lines and a body of 6,000 troopers led by
Sham Singh Attari went in pursuit. They overtook the fugitives. Hira Singh and his companions put up a
fight, but the odds against them were heavy. Among the 1,000 slain were Hira Singh, Jalla, Mian Sohan
Singh, son of Gulab Singh Dogtra, Mian Labh Singh, responsible for the massacre at Bhai Bir Singh’s centre,
and many others.
According to Cunningham, “That the Regimental Panchayats sincerely aimed at maintaining discipline
among the soldiers and protecting national interest is further provided by the fact that as soon as the decision
to mobilize against the British was made, they voluntarily stopped functioning by an agreement with the
executive head of the state, realizing the necessity of unity of counsel in the affairs of war.’’*+4
According to Hugh Pears (Memoirs of Alexander Gardner, pp. 265-66) “The resolve of their rulers
anyhow and by whatever means to destroy them was known even to the Sikh army itself; but such has been
the stern discipline of the Panches ...... such the real belief that the intentions of the British were aggressive ......
and such their devotion to their mystic faith that one single dogged determination filled the bosom of each
soldier. The word went round, ‘We will go to the sacrifice.” (Panth Lai Shahidi)>5
BRITISH PREPARATIONS FOR THE WAR
Having secured their hold on almost the whole of Hindustan by the late twenties of the nineteenth
century and after the death of Maharaja Ranjit Singh in 1839, the British resolved at actual dismemberment of
the Sikh Empire. Lord Auckland was recalled after the Kabul massacre and Lord Ellenborough was sent to
India as Governor-General in 1842. While still in England, he wrote to the Duke of Wellington on
Oct.15,1841, “I am most anxious to have your opinion as to the general principles, upon which a campaign
against the Punjab should be conducted.” In collusion with the Duke in England, Ellenborough again
started the bogey of ‘French intrigues’ with the Lahore Darbar with a view to prejudicing the British public
mind against the Sikhs. In this process, they also involved General Ventura of the Sikh service who regularly
informed the British of political happenings at Lahore. About this time, the Sandhanwalia Sardars, who on
resumption of power by Maharaja Sher Singh had either escaped to the British territory or were put in jail,
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
were called to return to Lahore through the intervention of the British Resident. Their old status and Jagirs
were restored. After some time, when they killed Sher Singh, his son Partap Singh, and Raja Dhyan Singh, it
raised Ellenborough’s hopes of the British soon becoming masters of the Punjab. He wrote to Queen
Victoria on Oct. 20, 1843, “It is impossible not to perceive that the ultimate tendency of the late events at
Lahore is, to bring the plains first and at somewhat later period, the hills under our control.’ The Governor
General was regularly informing the Duke and the Queen through his letters of Sept. 20, and Nov. 20, 1843
and again on July 2, and July 14, 1844, saying that, “There does not seem to be any feeling against us’, that,
“The Sikh army has remained tranquil and no indication has been given of the least desire to provoke the
resentment of the British Government’, that, “In the Punjab, there is more of pacific appearance than at any
time since the murder of Sher Singh’, and that, “There is much less apprehension than there has been at any
time since the death of Sher Singh that this tranquillity will be disturbed on the side of Punjab.’”® Yet, the
British continued war preparations. Writing to the Secret Committee on February 11, 1844, twenty two
months before the actual war, Ellenborough said, “I must confess, that when I look at the whole condition of
our army I had rather, if the contest cannot be further postponed, that it were at least postponed to
November, 1845.3? On Feb.15, 1844, he wrote to the Duke, “I earnestly hope that we may not be obliged to
cross the Sutlej in December next. We shall not be ready so soon. The army required a great deal of setting
up after five years of war. I am quietly doing what I can to strengthen and equip it ...... I know it would be
of protracted character. I should be obliged to remain at Lahore myself more than a year.’’4? He again wrote
to the Duke on April 20, 1844, “We are altogether very ill-provided with officers for the higher commands.
The whole army requires a great deal of teaching and I am satisfied the eighteen months I ask are not more
than enough to make it what it ought to be.”*#! Major Basu in his, Rese of Christian Power in India, asks, “Does it
not show conclusively the deep scheme of the British in bringing on the war with the Sikhs ?”’4? Elenborough
was so sute of the means he was adopting for creating the war and of the efficiency of his secret agents that
he wrote to the Duke, “Depend upon it, I will not engage in such an operation hastily or unnecessarily, and I
will do all I can beforehand to secure certain success if ever I should be obliged to undertake it.” When in
his efforts to capture the Prime Ministership at Lahore from his nephew Hira Singh, Raja Suchet Singh Dogra
was killed, the Governor-General informed the Duke on May 9, 1844, “Everything is going on there as we
could desire if we looked forward to the ultimate possession of Punjab.”’44
As the Afghan fiasco by Auckland and military preparations for war by Ellenborough had caused the
English Company great expenditure and losses, the latter was recalled in 1844. Sir Henry Hardinge was sent
to India as Governor-General. He was a great soldier and a veteran of the Peninsular War and had
participated in the Battle of Waterloo. His passion for military glory was as great as that of his predecessor.
There was not going to be any change of policy with regard to the Punjab war. The appointment of a person
as Governor-General, who had been a distinguished soldier, a mature parliamentarian and a statesman, clearly
pointed towards future plans for the Punjab. At his farewell banquet at London, the Chairman of the Court
of Directors conveyed a similar indication, when he said, “It has always been the desire of the Court that the
Government of East India Company should be eminently just, moderate and conciliatory, but the supremacy
of our power must be maintained, when necessary, by the force of our arms.” On Sir Henry’s arrival in
India, “He found the attention of Ellenborough had been turned seriously towards the North Western
Frontier; that all towns from Delhi to Karnal were filled with troops, that the Commander-in-Chief had
already surveyed the whole extent of the Protected States with a view to making choice of military positions,
and that the advanced parts of Ludhiana and Ferozepur had been strengthened.”* (Viscount Hardinge, pp
74-75). During the next sixteen months before the war, Sir Henry constantly added to the forces already
assembled at the Punjab frontier and raised them from 17,612 to 40,523 men and from 66 to 94 guns,
exclusive of hill stations.*”
THE BRIDGE OF BOATS
On instructions from the Duke, Ellenborough had got prepared seventy pontoons at Bombay and
brought them to Ferozepur for transporting troops and military supplies and the formation of a bridge over
the Sutlej to cross into the Punjab ‘for an offensive plan.’
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
MAJOR BROADFOOT
Major Broadfoot, a wat monger diplomat and a man of boundless ambition, after serving in the
Kabul expedition, was transferred to Burma. He intimately knew about preparations being made for the
Punjab war. He, therefore, applied on the basis of feigned ill-health to be brought to the North-Western side,
so that his health might be restored. He also added, “I could not recover if the Army were in the field, and I
am idler elsewhere.’’48 Ellenborough informed him, “If there should be, at any future time, a prospect of our
having more important operations, I will, if possible, have you with me.’ Consequently, Sir Henry, who
himself wanted a warlike diplomat at Ludhiana, appointed him resident to the Lahore Darbar. His arrival
added fresh vigour and speed to the war preparations already at an advanced stage. To provoke hostilities,
one of his first acts was to declare the Cis-Sutlej possessions of Sikhs as under the British protection.
According to Cunningham, “It was generally held by the English in India that Major Broadfoot’s
appointment greatly increased the probabilities of war with the Sikhs; and the impression was equally strong
that had Mr. Clerk, for instance, remained as Agent, there would have been no war. Had Mr. Clerk again or
Col. Wade been the British representative in 1845, either would have gone to Lahore in person and would
have remonstrated against the selfish and unscrupulous proceedings of the managers of affairs as obviously
tending to bring upon a rupture. They would have also taken measures to show to the troops that the British
Government would not be aggressors; they would have told the chiefs that a war would compromise them
with the English, nor would they have come away until every personal risk had been run, and every exertion
used to avert resort to arms.”5° George Campbell records, “Several accounts agree that in the period
immediately preceding the war when matters were becoming very serious and the Sikh army had, for the most
part, taken affairs into their own hands, they maintained for a while wonderful order at Lahore and through
their Panches exercised an almost puritanical discipline in the military republic ...... The immediate collision
however was, I think, hastened by imprudence on the part of British Frontier Agent Major Broadfoot. I
knew of some things done by him which it would be difficult to defend. But he paid the penalty by his death
in the actions which followed.’!
ARMY PANCHAYATS AND PUNJAB CHIEFS
The Sikh Army, and the population generally, were convinced that war was inevitable. When moved
as much by jealousy of one another as by a common dread of the army, the Chiefs of the Punjab had clung to
wealth and ease rather than honour and independence. Gulab Singh Dogtra, Lal Singh, Tej Singh and many
others all felt incapable to control the troops. They considered their only chance of retaining power was
through a contest with the British which they believed would end in their dispersion, and pave the way for
their own recognition as ministers more surely than if they did their duty by the state. According to
Cunningham, “Had the shrewd Army Panchayats observed no military preparations on the part of the English,
they would not have heeded the insidious exhortations of such mercenary men as Lal Singh and Tej Singh,
although in former days, they would have marched uninquiringly towards Delhi at the bidding of their great
Maharaja.”’>* Even a gurmata was passed by the Panchayats on Sept. 21,1845, saying, “They wanted peace rather
than conflict’ with the British, adding, ‘If the English forces advanced towards Ludhiana and Ferozepur from
the east, only then they will proceed towards Sutlej.’> This information was conveyed to his Government by
Maj. Broadfoot vide his letter of September 26, 1845. Maharani Jindan was also not in favour of war. “But,
the advice of the Rani and many of the Sardars was disregarded’’>+, says Dr M’Gregor in his Hestory of the
Sikhs, (ii. 39).
According to Lahore court historian, Sohan Lal Suri, “On the report of Rai Kishan Chand, the Court
Vaikil, that the British intend to occupy the Cis-Sutlej territories of the Darbar, lot of excitement was
created.” The anti-British party proposed military action, but the Maharani cautioned the courtiers against
such a step saying that, “In the event of clash with the British, the Govt. of Maharaja Dalip Singh was likely
to suffer, Diwan Dina Nath and Faqir Aziz-ud-Din supporting her views.’’°¢
According to Lt. Col. R.G. Burton, “while the Army declared they desired peace, there was a strong
patty backed by traitors who urged them to war and the Army men would assemble in groups in their camps
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
and cantonments and meet round the tomb of Ranjit Singh to talk of the battle in prospect and to swear
fidelity to the Khalsa.’’>”
THE BRITISH WITHOUT A PLEA FOR WAR
Although British preparations for war were complete, yet in the absence of any provocation from the
Sikhs and also in view of their gwrmata for peace, the English were unable to find an excuse for war. Sir
Henry Hardinge wrote to Ellenborough on January 23, 1845, “If the hills and plains weaken each other, on
what plea could we attack the Punjab ? How are we to justify the seizure of our friend’s territory, who in our
adversity assisted us to retrieve our affairs.”°* A month and a half before the war, Hardinge again wrote to
Ellenborough on October 23, “We must bear in mind that as yet no cause for war has been given.”5? Even
five days after the declaration of war by the British, Hardinge was not convinced of its moral justification.
Robert Cust wrote on December 18, “I rode behind the Governor-General. He remarked : Will the people
of England consider this (crossing the Sutlej by the Sikhs) an actual invasion of our frontier and a justification
of war °°? But peace was not the policy of the British at this stage. Time fixed by Ellenborough and
confirmed by Hardinge was coming to a close. The Commander-in-Chief Lord Gough had already arrived
near the border and fixed his headquarters at Ambala. Gulab Singh Dogra had fulfilled his promise to
‘Divide the Lahore Govt., the army and the people.’ The Sikhs had been sufficiently provoked and irritated.
The only thing that remained to be done to start the war was to give the Sikhs the final provocation by
marching troops towards the Sikh frontier, so that they might as well march and cross the Sutlej to protect
their territories to the south east of the river. This, the British did on December 6, 1845, when the
Commander-in-Chief Lord Gough marched with his troops from Ambala towards the Sikh frontier. The
Sikhs patiently watched the situation for a week. It was only on December 12 that the first Sikh detachment
crossed the Sutle] and encamped in their own territory. The passage of their artillery was not completed till
December 16. Inspite of the fact that the Sikhs were camping in their own area across the river, and had
violated no provision of any treaty or committed any aggression against the British, yet the Governor-General
issued his proclamation on December 13, declaring war on the Sikhs, and confiscating and annexing to the
British territories the Sikh possessions on the left bank of the Sutlej.°!
FIRST SIKH WAR
We may now briefly tell the tale of the battles fought during the first Sikh War and the part played by
the traitors Gulab Singh Dogtra, Misr Tej Singh, Misr Lal Singh and their henchmen. “Their services had
been secured beforehand by the British. The former had been assured the provinces of Jammu and Kashmir
and the latter, both mercenaries from Uttar Pradesh and Rohtas, had been guaranteed their offices of
Commander-in-Chief and Prime Minister respectively.”
THE BATTLE OF MUDKI
Lal Singh was unwilling to cross Sutlej, but when forced by his zealous soldiery to do so, he wrote to
Capt. Nicholson, Assistant to Maj. Broadfoot at Ferozepur, “I have crossed the river with the Sikh Army.
You know my friendship for the British. Tell me what to do.” Nicholson replied, “Do not attack Ferozepur.
Halt as many days as you can. And then march towards the Governor-General.”® About this incident,
Cunningham says, “The object, indeed of Lal Singh and Tej Singh was not to compromise themselves with
the English by destroying an isolated division at Ferozepur, but to get their own troops dispersed by the
converging forces of their opponents.’ John Ludlow says, “Had he attacked, our garrison of 8,000 men at
Ferozepur would have been destroyed and the victorious 60,000 would have fallen on Sir Henry Hardinge,
who had then but 8,000. So utterly unprepared were we, that even this treachery of one of our enemies
scarcely sufficed to save us.’
According to Col. Mouton of the Sikh Service, “Lal Singh robbed the ardour of the Sikhs a great
deal by assuring them of the defection of 4 Indian battalions in the English army which would surely join
them.”
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
About the general temperament of the Sikh soldiers, Cunningham writes; “Every Sikh considered the
cause as his own, and he would work as a labourer as well as carry a musket; he would drag guns, drive
bullocks, lead camels, load and unload boats with a cheerful alacrity, which contrasted strongly with the inept
and sluggish obedience of mere mercenaries, drilled indeed, and fed with skill and care, but unwarmed by one
generous feeling for their country and their foreign employers.”
Lal Singh’s force comprised of 18,000 infantry, 16,000 cavalry and 85 guns. Leaving about 7,000
men with 20 guns to watch over Ferozepur, he moved towards Mudki on the afternoon of December 17,
1845. During their march, whether by design or by accident, the troops lost their way. After a whole night’s
wandering, they arrived not at Mudki but at Ferozeshah in the morning. It was here that he got the message
that the Governor-General had reached Mudki. Lal Singh moved from Ferozeshah with only half the force
with him on the false plea that Tej Singh might require the remainder. Under such circumstances of intrigue
and treachery, began the battle of Mudki on the afternoon of December 18, 1845.
Cunningham describes the battle, “Lal Singh headed the attack, but in accordance with the original
design, he involved his followers in an engagement, and left them to fight as their undirected valour might
prompt.”6 The battle lasted less than two hours, during which, in the words of Lord Gough, “The Sikhs
fought as if they had everything at stake.”°? Considering the brevity of the action, the British losses were
deemed heavy, General Sir Robert Sale and Sir Joseph Macgaskill and two aides of the Governor-General
being amongst the 215 killed. On close of the battle, the Sikhs withdrew to Ferozeshah by midnight.
BATTLE OF FEROZESHAH
There was no movement of troops on 19th and 20th, although the adversaries remained at a very
close range of each other. The Sikhs used this respite to their best ability by throwing up earthwork without
guidance from senior officers or expert technicians. Lal Singh conveyed this position to the British through
emissary Shams-ud-Din. The Governor-General ordered Sir Littler to bring assistance from Ferozepur. He
also sent his available transport at Mudki to bring the European hilly troops already on the march to the
scene of battle. Relinquishing his senior civil status as Governor-General, he decided to take part in the battle
as Second-in-Command to Lord Gough. In view of what he saw of the fighting spirit of the Sikhs at Mudki,
he overruled Gough and ordered that the attack be deferred till Littler’s force from Ferozepur joined the
main army. On the other hand, Tej Singh with a force of ten thousand under him remained idle in the
neighbourhood of the battlefield absurdly pretending that he was guarding Ferozepur although Littler’s force
had left the place in broad daylight.
Lord Gough opened the attack at 3:30 P.M. on December 21. He himself led the right, the
Governor-General the centre and Sir Littler the left wing of the assailing force. As the British forces came in
sight, the Sikh gunners opened fire. Such were the quick volleys of this fire that within ten minutes two
hundred British soldiers were either killed or crippled and Sir Littler retired with his force. General Harry
Smith who tried to take a Sikh position, was also repulsed. Sir Walter Gilbert and General Wallace showed
tremendous daring with some success, losing 270 men in the exploit. The British now found themselves in a
grave position. Half their force under Littler and Harry Smith was outside the Sikh entrenchments, but the
other half within, unable to advance. Cunningham, who was present in the battle gives a graphic description
of the battle scene, “Darkness and the obstinacy of the contest threw the English in confusion; men of all
regiments and arms were mixed together; Generals were doubtful of the fact or of the extent of their own
success and Colonels knew not what had become of the regiments they commanded or of the army of which
they formed a part.””°
He adds, “On that memorable night, the English were hardly masters of the ground on which they
stood; they had no reserves at hand, while the enemy had fallen back upon a second army, and could renew
the fight with increased numbers. The not imprudent thought occurred of retiring upon Ferozepur. On the
morning of December 22, the last remnants of the Sikhs were driven from their camp; but as the day
advanced, the second wing of their army approached in battle array, and the wearied and famished English
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
saw before them a desperate, and perhaps a useless struggle. This reserve was commanded by Tej Singh, who
had been urged by his sincere soldiery to fall upon the English at daybreak, but his object was to have the
dreaded army of the Khalsa overcome and dispersed, and he delayed until Lal Singh’s force was everywhere
put to flight, and until his opponents had again ranged themselves around their colours. Even at the last
moment, he rather skirmished and made feints than led his men to a resolute attack, and after a time, he
precipitately fled, leaving his subordinates without orders and without an object, at a moment when the
artillery ammunition of the English had failed, when a portion of their force was retiring upon Ferozepur, and
when no exertions could have prevented the remainder from retreating likewise, if the Sikhs had boldly
pressed forward.”7!
Lal Singh had spent the day hidden in a ditch and at night stole away to Amritsar.
Col. G. B. Malleson writes, “Then among many panic set in. The cry of ‘India lost’ was heard from
one Commanding Officer who tried in vain to rally his men. The left attack on the Khalsa had failed so
signally that it could not be renewed. The Sikh army had repulsed the British attack. They had driven back
Littler, forced Smith to retire, compelled even Gilbert to evacuate the position he had gained, and had thrown
the whole British army into disorder. What was more, they had still 10,000 men under Tej Singh. Had a
guiding mind directed the movements of the Sikh army, nothing could have saved the exhausted British.”
Sit Robert Cust records in his diary, “December 22. News came from the Governor-General that
our attack of yesterday had failed, that affairs were desperate, that all state papers were to be destroyed, and
that if the morning attack failed, all would be over; this was kept secret by Mr. Currie and we were concerting
measures to make an unconditional surrender to save the wounded, the part of the news that grieved me the
most.”7
General Sir Hope Grant, who fought in the Anglo-Sikh wars says; “Sir Henry Hardinge thought it
was all up, and gave his sword, a present from the Duke of Wellington and which once belonged to
Napoleon, and his Star of the Bath to his son, with directions to proceed to Ferozepur, remarking that, ‘If the
day were lost, he must fall.”””4
William Edwards writes, “Had the Sikhs advanced during the night, the result must have been very
disastrous to us, as our European regiments were much reduced in number and our ammunition both for
artillery and small arms almost expended.’””5
Cunningham records, “As regards Tej Singh’s treachery, it may be stated that according to a reliable
tradition, that officer discovered early in the operations that his artillery ammunition had been tampered with
and much of it rendered useless. Such treachery on the part of his own side doubtless had considerable
effect on his subsequent conduct.”
Wiliam Edwards, Under Secretary to the British Govt., who followed the Governor-General in the
thick of these battles, mentions having been told by Lord Hardinge, “That the fire of Sikh artillery was even
mote terrible than at Albuera, for the Sikhs had guns in position of treble the calibre ever used in European
warfare.”
GULAB SINGH DOGRA’S TREACHEROUS NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE BRITISH
According to Ahluwalia and Kirpal Singh, “More dangerous than the treachery of Tej Singh and Lal
Singh in the battlefield, were the political intrigues of Gulab Singh Dogra, who was then conducting
negotiations with the Governor-General. As the plenipotentiary of the Lahore Darbar, Gulab Singh did not
hesitate to sell his country. He had already agreed to the following conditions dictated by the British, (i) that
the Sikh Army should be attacked by the British, (ti) that after being defeated, it should be abandoned by its
own Government, and (iii) that the passage of the Sutlej should be unopposed and the road to the capital laid
open to the victor.””®
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Luckily for the Sikhs, the main hitch still remained: the dispersal of the Sikh Army. Gulab Singh
had shown his inability to accomplish this, and had left it entirely to the British, whose immediate aim was to
drive the Sikhs across the Sutlej and secure the unconditional submission of the chiefs and delegates of the
army. But a single defeat could not completely disperse so large and well-equipped an army of the brave
Khalsa.
SHAM SINGH ATTARI ARRIVES ON THE SCENE
Sardar Sham Singh Attari was in Ludhiana District when the hostilities began. As soon as the Sikh
forces crossed the Sutlej, he returned to his village Attari. When the news of the defeat reached Maharani
Jindan, she dispatched ten horsemen to the Sardar with an urgent message. The Attari Chief hurried to the
scene of battle to find the shameful part played by the traitors in the hope of being upheld as Ministers of a
dependent kingdom. When he fully apprised himself of the situation, he hesitated for a while to take
command. But in view of the delicate political situation then existing, he decided to follow the course which
the legendary Maharaja had taught them to take when honour and duty to their faith and country were
involved. Accordingly, he declared his resolve to resist the British and stop them from occupying the Punjab.
The Sikhs dejected at their defeat at Ferozeshah again took heart and were inspired anew by his
noble example. Cunningham again describes the scene, “The dangers which threatened the Sikh people
pressed upon their mind and they saw no escape from foreign subjection. The grey bearded chief, Sham
Singh of Attari, made known his resolution to die in the first conflict with the enemies of his race and so to
offer himself as a sacrifice of propitiation to the spirit of Gobind and to the genius of his mystic
Commonwealth.””
BATTLE OF SABRAON
By the close of the first week of February, 1846, the Sikh Army had constructed formidable
entrenchments about two and a half miles long on the left bank of the Sutlej near Sabraon. Their batteries
were placed about six feet high protected by deep trenches. These defensive works were connected with the
right bank by a bridge of boats. Some twenty to twenty five thousand men and seventy guns were placed
behind these entrenchments. Nevertheless, the traitors were determined once again to see the Khalsa Army
beaten. Lal Singh was again re-imposed on the Army. Two days before the battle, Lal Singh again sent
Shams-ud-Din to Major Lawrence with details of its defensive plan. The weakest point in the Sikh line was
its right flank where the loose sand made it impossible to build high parapets for heavy guns. It was to be
protected by the ghorcharas and light camel guns which only fired balls one or two pounds in weight;
moreover, the command of this wing was reserved by Lal Singh for himself. On the basis of this intelligence,
Cunningham writes, “it was arranged that the whole of the heavy ordnance should be planted in masses
opposite particular points of the enemy entrenchments, and that when the Sikhs had been shaken by a
continuous storm of shot and shell, the right or weakest point of their position should be assaulted in line by
the strongest of the three investing divisions, which together mustered nearly fifteen thousand men.”® Sir
Robert Dick’s Division was ordered to commence the attack on the right flank with Sir Walter Gilbert’s
Division in immediate support on the right. Sir Harry Smith’s Division was to be close to Gilbert’s right to
support him.
Sardar Sham Singh, knowing that 10th February was going to be the day of battle, rose early in the
morning, dressed himself in white, and mounting his white mare proceeded to address the Sikh Army. He
reminded the assembled Khalsa about their glorious traditions of bravery and sacrifices in the past and
begged them, as true sons of the soil, to die rather than turn their backs on the enemy. Since he had himself
dedicated his life to the sacred cause, his words had the desired effect.
Dick’s Division advanced according to plan and found the defenses weak and easily surmountable, as
Lal Singh’s emissaries had reported. The 10th Queen’s Regiment broke through totally unopposed, but when
the entire division had penetrated some way, it was suddenly fallen upon by the Sikhs and driven back. Sir
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Robert Dick was himself mortally wounded. “Rally those men”, the Governor-General shouted.*! Colonel
Wood, his Aide-de-Camp, galloped to the centre of the line and seizing the colours from the hands of an
ensign carried them to the front. In a moment, the wavering British troops had rallied and stormed the
breastworks simultaneously with the Brigade of Gilbert’s Division, who had also experienced a similar check,
but had soon recovered their lost ground. Now both Gilbert’s and Dick’s Divisions engaged in what may be
called the deadliest hand-to-hand encounter with the Sikh infantry.
During the first British attack, Sardar Sham Singh had been present almost everywhere. He did not
allow his men to lose heart, as he moved from column to column urging the men to fight on. His action
stirred the Sikhs to greater efforts and the British were eventually repulsed. William Edwards, who was
present during the attack, has described the scene most graphically. “Gilbert’s troops immediately advanced,
but finding the centre of the works from their height perfectly impregnable, were driven back with very heavy
loss. Sit Harry Smith’s Division, instead of being near the right of Gilbert, was on the extreme left of the
Sikh position. It also advanced on the works in front, and was driven back with great loss.”
For some time, the issue of the battle of Sabraon was hanging in the balance as the conflict raged
fiercely. Cunningham describes the contest, “The round shot exploded tumbrils or dashed heaps of sand into
the air; the hollow shells cast their fatal contents fully before them, and the devious rocket sprang aloft with
fury to fall hissing amid a flood of men but all was in vain; the Sikhs stood unappalled and flash for flash
returned and fire for fire.”®? According to Kapur Singh, “The ill-equipped, ill-fed and ingloriously betrayed
Sikh soldiers fought the enemy with such bravery and ferocity that the enemy had to make hurried special
contacts with Generals Lal Singh and Tej Singh to save the situation for them, who readily obliged by
retreating with munitions, guns and the battalions of Dogra and Gorkha soldiers across the Sutlej, from
where they trained a formidable battery of guns at the back of the fighting Sikh Army, after destroying the
boat bridge on the river. Thus, the sure defeat of the enemy was again converted into years of occupation of
Lahore by the British and consolidation of their hold on the country.’
Hesketh Pearson says, “A British defeat was again turned into a victory by the convenient flight of
Tej Singh, who damaged the bridge of boats over the Sutlej on his way, and so helped to drown a large
number of his countrymen.”*5
Lord Gough described Sabraon as the Waterloo of India. Writing to Sir Robert Peel, the British
Prime Minister, he paid glowing tribute to the Sikhs. “Policy precluded me publicly recording my sentiments
on the splendid gallantry of our fallen foe, or to record the acts of heroism displayed, not only individually,
but almost collectively by the Sikh sardars and the army, and I declare, were it not from a deep conviction that
my country’s good required the sacrifice, I could have wept to have witnessed the fearful slaughter of so
devoted a body of men.” Lord Gough then told the whole truth when he added, “Certain it is that there
would have been a different story to tell if the body of men had not been commanded by traitors.”8¢
Out of the once 54 European officers in the Khalsa army, only two, namely Col. Mouton and Col.
Harbon took part in the First Anglo-Sikh War. Col. Mouton, a Commander of Regular Cavalry and a French
officer, published a report in Paris in 1846, which zter-ala, records, “Very little was needed to conquer the
British, at least in the north of India. The English were almost conquered. If the outcome of these first
encounters were favourable, then three kingdoms, an infinite number of Rajas and Musalmans of Kabul,
numbering about a hundred thousand men more would have come out of the Punjab to their succour.
Without treason a campaign of one month would have lead us to Delhi. Shame, therefore, to all those who
enriched by the great Maharaja or his successors, preferred dishonour and the breaking up of the kingdom to
a glorious war and the sharing of its perils.”’*”
The self-sacrifice of Sardar Sham Singh, the hero of Sabraon, had an inspiring effect. According to
Cunningham, “No Sikh offered to submit and no disciple of Govind asked for quarter. They everywhere
showed a front to the victor and stalked slowly and sullenly away, while many rushed singly forth to meet
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
assured death by contending with a multitude.” According to Lord Hardinge who was present in the battle,
“Few escaped; none, it may be said, surrendered. The Sikhs met their fate with the resignation which
distinguishes their race.”88
Sardar Sham Singh’s courage and determination had turned Sabraon into the Waterloo of India, as
according to Malleson, ‘Victory for the Sikhs would have meant to the English the loss of India.’ The
Sardar’s devotion to his country’s cause was unique in an era of betrayals, and his fidelity and self-sacrifice
shone like a beacon amidst the treachery and selfishness of his contemporaries who sold their country to the
foreigners. Indeed Sardar Sham Singh proved himself a prince among patriots and martyrs.
According to the secret understanding with the Governor-General, no opposition was offered to the
British troops who arrived at Lahore on 20-2-1846. Two days later, a portion of the fort was garrisoned by
the British Regiments.
SETTING UP A PLIANT GOVERNMENT AT LAHORE
According to Sita Ram Kohli, “Lord Hardinge now addressed himself to the task of setting up a
pliant government at Lahore. The Khalsa were made to vacate the citadel and its immediate vicinity. These
were occupied by British and the Muhammedan battalions in the service of the Darbar. Sikh troops were
otdered to move across the river Ravi and camp at Shahadara, and no Sikh soldier was to enter the city
without a permit’, for the Governor-General knew them as, “The finest soldiers in Asia, bold and daring
Republicans,” as he wrote in a private letter dated March 19, 1846 to Ellenborough in England. (Hardinge
Family Papers, Penhurst, Kent, England.)°!
Sita Ram Kohli adds, “The Sikh soldiers who had fought so valiantly, posed a major problem. About
20,000 of them though vanquished were not without fight. Some were encamped at Ratwind, half-way
between Lahore and Ferozepur; a few thousand near Amritsar. In addition, there were strong garrisons at
Peshawar, Multan and various points in the kingdom. On the other hand, British troops had suffered
considerably in the campaign; for instance, besides every member of Lord Hardinge’s personal staff having
been either killed or severely wounded during the war, the Governor-General himself, as a result of a fall
from a horse, was almost a cripple during the battle of Sabraon. He came to the field in a carriage and
mounted his horse only when guns opened fire.’°? The season was advancing into summer. The British-
Indian treasury was depleted. The idea of an immediate annexation of the Punjab had, therefore, to be
deferred. But Lord Hardinge was determined to make the state so weak that its eventual absorption into the
British empire would present no major problem. He wrote to the Secret Committee : “A diminution of
strength of such a war-like nation on our weakest frontier seems to me imperatively required. I have,
therefore, determined to take a strong and fertile district between the Sutlej and Beas. This will cover
Ludhiana, and will bring us within a few miles of Amritsar, with our backs to the hills. In a military sense; it
will be very important it will weaken the Sikhs and punish them in the eyes of Asia. I shall demand one
million and a half in money as compensation, and if I can arrange to make Gulab Singh and the hill tribes
independent, including Kashmere, I shall have weakened the war-like republic. Its army must be disbanded
and reorganized. The numbers of the artillery must be limited. The Maharaja himself must present the keys
of Gobindgarh and Lahore, where the terms must be dictated and signed.”
THE TREATY OF LAHORE MARCH 9, 1846
On Match 9, 1846, was signed the treaty of Lahore imposed by the British upon the young Maharaja
Duleep Singh, aged seven and a half years. By this treaty, among other things,
(a) the British Government took possession of all the territories of the Lahore Government lying to the south of Suttle]
and of the Doab, hill and plain situated between the rivers Sutlej and the Beas, and :
(b) also the territories of Jammu and Kashmir between the Beas and the Indus to be alienated to Gulab Singh as a
sovereign ruler in lieu of his services to the British Government, and :
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
(c) the British Government will not exercise any interference in the internal administration of the Lahore State, but in
all cases or questions which may be referred to the British Government, the Governor-General will give the aid of his advice and
good offices for the furtherance of the interests of the Lahore Government.
On the third day, March 11, another Agreement was dictated to the Lahore Darbar, whereby, in
addition to other terms,
(a) British force was to be stationed at Lahore, which force shall not be detained at Lahore beyond the expiration of the
current year(1846);
(b) the British Government had the choice to retain any part of the State property in addition to what had been
confiscated paying for it at a fair valuation.
In addition to Maharaja Duleep Singh, who was only a helpless child of seven and a half years, both
of these treaties were signed by seven chiefs. The first of them, Bhai Ram Singh (real brother of traitor Tej
Singh’s father) had been an agent of Gulab Singh Dogra in his treacherous negotiations with the British. The
next two were the notorious Lal Singh and Tej Singh, whom the British had recognised as the chief men of
the State. The other four were associated with them to keep up the appearance of the representative
character of the signatories. “These ready instruments of our policy and the betrayers of their country’,
wrote Sir Claud Wade, “were not representing the nation’, yet it suited the British authorities to place them in
privileged positions.
About this, Cunningham says : “The transaction scarcely seems worthy of the British name and
greatness, and the objections became stronger when it is considered that Gulab Singh had agreed to pay sixty-
eight dakhs of Rupees as a fine to his paramount ruler before the war broke out, and that the custom of the
East as well as of the West requires the feudatory to aid his lord in foreign wars and domestic strife. Gulab
Singh ought thus to have paid the deficient million of money as a Lahore subject instead of being put in
possession of the Lahore provinces as an independent prince.”
Lal Singh, as a reward for his services was raised to his old office of Prime Ministership, while Tej
Singh in a formal Darbar was taised to the status of a Raja.
Thus we have seen the circumstances under which the Sikhs were forced to cross the boundary river
Sutlej, and were repulsed through sheer intrigue and treachery of its own so-called leaders, Lal Singh and Tej
Singh, as also Gulab Singh Dogtra who was then empowered by the Darbar to negotiate a treaty of peace with
the British.
INSTALLATION OF REGENCY
We may now examine the installation of the Regency. According to Article I of the Agreement of
March 11, 1846, the British troops were not to be retained in the Punjab beyond the end of December, 1846.
The Lahore Darbar had, therefore, begun to initiate measures for the administration of the country after the
departure of the British. But the latter, on the other hand, wished to stay on in the Punjab with a strong force
and to hold it in a tight grip with unlimited powers given to a Resident representative of the Governor-
General. To this, the Lahore Darbar was not willing to agree, still less to request the British Government for
it, as desired by Sir Henry Hardinge.
Sit Henry Hardinge wrote to Frederick Currie, his Secretary, on December 10, 1846, “The coyness of
the Darbar and the Sardars is very natural, but it is very important that the proposal should originate with
them, and in any document proceeding from them, this admission must be stated in clear and unqualified
terms, our reluctance to undertake a heavy responsibility must be set forth.”
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
But as the Darbar could not be easily brought round to make the desired request, the Governor-
General wrote to his Secretary again on December 12, to, “persevere in your line of making the Sikh Darbar
propose the condition or rather their readiness to assent to any conditions imposed as the price of the
continuance of our support. In the preamble of the supplementary Articles, this solicitation must clearly be
their act.”
The Governor-General wrote to Currie on 7-12-1846, “In any agreement made for continuing the
occupation of Lahore, Maharani’s deprivation of power is an indispensable condition.”®’ He again wrote on
the 10th, “If the Sardars and influential Chiefs, and especially the Attariwala family, urge the British
Government to be the guardian of the Maharaja during his minority, the Rani’s power will cease silently and
quietly, the admission being recorded that the British Government as the guardian of the boy and
administering the affairs of the state, is to exercise all the functions and possess all the powers of the Regent
acting on behalf of the Prince’
Henry and John Lawrence were assiduous in implementing Hardinge’s policy. On the one hand,
they sought to exacerbate a feeling of helplessness that prevailed in the Lahore Darbar, and emphasised the
fact that the time agreed upon for the withdrawal of British troops was at hand; on the other, they set
themselves to foster in the minds of the individual Sardars hopes of obtaining favour with the British if they
remained loyal. They were given to understand that in their doing so, lay the only chance of retaining their
estates and privileges. This would serve in the words of Lord Hardinge, “as a powerful stimulus to ensure
their adhesion to the conditions imposed.” As indeed it turned out to be.
The Rani’s goodwill was not so easily to be gained. As soon as the Governor-General’s proposals
came up for consideration in the Darbar (December 9), she made a countet-proposal, that she be formally
recognised as head of the government and be lent by the British two regiments of infantry, one of cavalry
and a battery of artillery. This was not acceptable to the British, nor did they encourage the Sardars to fall in
with it .°
In December, 1846, Lord Hardinge was encamped at Bharowal, a few marches from Lahore, and
there planned an elaborate charade to stimulate the Darbar into decision. He began to send instructions to
Currie on December 12 with a view to creating an impression of military arrangements afoot. He wrote, “I
send this by express to desire that the Regiment of Native infantry, the 2 guns and the Irregular Cavalry,
escorting Lal Singh may not return to Lahore ...... these troops will cross the Sutlej and encamp at
Ferozepore till further orders, and the troops ordered from Ferozepore to Kasoor will be countermanded ......
my object is to give the Lahore Darbar a hint that the garrison is on the move ...... it also authorizes you to
send another regiment of native infantry from Lahore to Ferozepore, there to encamp till further orders and
not to be relieved by any other regiment from Ferozepore ...... H.M. 80th Regiment will receive orders to
march to Meerut at any moment. H.M. 10th at Ferozepore are ready to relieve them, but will not move till
ordered, nor will it transpire that they are intended to relieve the 80th. These announcements will be made to
accelerate the Darbar’s decision.” 00
Two days later, he wrote, “This day (14 December) and tomorrow will enable you to form a pretty
accurate judgement of the progress you are likely to make. I authorize you to desire Sir John Littler (in
command of the British garrison at Lahore) to move all the troops out of Lahore by the end of a week, on
the day you may judge to be the most expedient, encamping them as near as may be convenient, to the
citadel. If this hint should be unnecessary by the temper of the chiefs to assent to our views, it will not be
made.’!0!
Lord Hardinge’s stratagem was effective. The Sardars sent messages to Lawrence pledging their
support to the Governor-General’s scheme. Henry Lawrence, keeping in view the Rani’s counter-proposal,
wished matters to be arranged in a constitutional manner. An assembly of people, with more than fifty
Sardars among, them, was to decide the future administrative set-up of the state during the minority of the
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
tuler. This meeting was held in Henry Lawrence’s tent on 15th December, and “was more fully attended than
any state meeting I have yet seen at Lahore; the momentous importance of the occasion to the Khalsa having,
in addition to the Ministers and principal Sardars, drawn many petty chiefs, officers, and yeomen to the spot.
An Akali, in the full costume of his order, with high blue turban, wreathed with steel quoits and crescents,
was quite a new figure in this deliberative assembly, and showed that all ranks took an interest in the business
of the day.”!°! Sir Frederick Currie had been Foreign Secretary to Government of India for six years from
1842 to 1847, during which period a number of independent states had been annexed to the British
dominions in India and had thus become an expert in manipulating circumstances to serve as a pretext for
hostilities and ultimate annexation. He then explained to the members of the z~promptu constituent assembly,
clause by clause, the terms on which the Governor-General would consent to keep the British troops in the
Punjab, and at the same time, place at their service, a senior British officer to advise in matters of
administration. They were then left to discuss the matter among themselves, while Currie and Lawrence went
to another tent. After a while, a deputation of six Sardars arrived, asking by way of change in the Governor-
General’s proposal, only that the amount required in return for the loan of British troops, Rs. 2,600,000, be
reduced. After an amicable talk, this was done and the sum fixed at Rs. 2,200,000. Currie then sent an
express letter to the Governor-General at Bharowal, informing him that agreement had been reached, to
which the reply was immediate and most gracious : “The result deserves my most unqualified approbation,
and I shall be happy to record another instance of the approved ability, zeal, temper and judgement you have
shown, aided by the local experience, reputation and well-established influence of Lieutenant Colonel
Lawrence. It is quite impossible to have brought this affair to a more satisfactory conclusion. Your intimate
knowledge of my sentiments and the concurrence of our views in Punjab politics have enabled you, most
successfully, to realise all the objects I had in view, not only in the substance of the arrangements made, but
in the form of the proceedings, for, you have conducted this matter so judiciously that the truth and sincerity
of our policy cannot be brought into doubt, or the honour of the British Government suffer any
impeachment.”!9
“The moral effect of the Sikh chiefs entreating the British Government to become the guardian of
the prince, by the continuance of a British garrison at Lahore, and our consent to undertake the responsible
charge, must be felt throughout Asia in raising the reputation and extending the influence of the British
character.’?104
“Personally I may regret that it has not been my fate to plant a British standard on the banks of the
Indus. I have taken the less ambitious course, and I am consoled by the reflection that I have acted right for
the interests of England and India.’’!0
Thus was the treaty of Bharowal manoeuvered on 16.12.1846, again through intrigue, in utter
disregard of some important provisions of earlier treaties of March 9 and 11 of the same year. The treaty of
Bharowal provided for the installation of a Council of Regency with Tej Singh at its head. But actually the
Regency was a body of executive officers who were to carry out the orders of the British Resident at Lahore,
who in the words of the Governor-General, “Can change them and appoint others, and in military matters
his power is as unlimited as in the civil administration; he can withdraw Sikh garrisons replacing them by
British troops and in every part of Punjab.”!06
The British Government also became the self-appointed sole guardian of the person and property of
Maharaja Dalip Singh. In the words of Sir Herbert Edwardes, “The beginning of the year 1847 thus found
Henry Lawrence in peaceful possession of viceregal authority over the province.”!"” The annual allowance of
Maharani Jindan was fixed at Rs. one “ks and a half. This arrangement was to continue during the minority
of Maharaja Dalip Singh until Sept. 4, 1854.
Henry Lawrence, though fully equipped with powers and prestige as Resident to rule the state, felt
nervous and reported to the Governor-General on 9.4.1847, “The national independence of the Sikh
character may dictate the attempt to escape from foreign yoke, for, however benevolent be our motives and
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
conciliating our demeanour, a British army cannot garrison Lahore, and the fiat of a British functionary
cannot supersede that of the Darbar throughout the land, without our presence being considered a burden
and a yoke.’’8 The members of the Regency headed by traitor Tej Singh and some others having been
enticed to their individual interests, the Resident considered the Maharani to be the only stumbling block to
be removed for smooth annexation. Thus recommending her “expulsion from the Punjab for ever’, he
wrote to the Secretary of the Governor-General on 9.8.1847, “I don’t disguise for myself, nor do I wish the
Governor-General to be ignorant of the fact that the Maharani is the only effective enemy to our policy that I
know of in the country.” The Governor-General replied on 23.10.47, “In all our measures taken during the
minority, we must bear in mind that by the Treaty of Lahore, March 1846, the Punjab never was intended to
be an independent State. By the clause I added, the chief of the State can neither make war or peace, or
exchange or sell an acre of territory or admit of a European Officer, or refuse us a thoroughfare through his
territories, or, in fact, perform any act without our permission. In fact, the native prince is in fetters, and
under our protection, and must do our bidding.’”!
Thus further strengthened with the authority from the Governor-General, the Resident Sir Henry
Lawrence and later Sir Currie cooked up excuses first to intern her in the Samman Tower of the Lahore Fort,
then transferred her to Sheikhu Pura Fort and finally banished her to the British territory (Chunar Fort) in
Uttar Pradesh. The Maharani, at this near loss of the kingdom and separation from her son, only 9 years old,
now under protection of traitors and foreigners, with her monthly allowance of Rs. 12,500 under the treaty,
reduced first to Rs. 4000/- p.m. and on banishment to U.P. to Rs. 1,000/- p.m. and all her
communications with the outside world completely cut off, broken and subdued in spirit, was deeply smitten
at heart. She vehemently protested to the Resident, “I had entrusted my head to your care”, the Maharani
wrote to John Lawrence, then acting Resident, from her place of confinement. “You ought to have instituted
an enquiry, and then charged me with what you found against me ...... Why do you take possession of my
kingdom by underhand means ? Why do you not do it openly ? ...... Do justice to me or I shall appeal to
London headquarters.” Without her son, the Maharani was without power and wrote passionate letters to
Lawrence begging to be re-united with him, “You have been very cruel to me!” she wailed, “You have
snatched my son from me. For ten months I kept him in my womb ...... In the name of the God you
worship and in the name of the King whose salt you eat, restore my son to me. I cannot bear the pain of this
separation. Instead, you should put me to death.’’!!
Lawrence wrote a conciliatory reply, assuring her that her son was perfectly happy and in good
hands. “I am very glad to hear from your letter that the Maharajah is happy”, she answered on August 30,
1847, “Whatever you write may be true. But my mind does not believe that the Maharajah is happy. How
can he, whose mother has been separated from him, be happy ° ...... Weeping, he was torn away from his
mother and taken to Shalamar Garden, while the mother was dragged out by her hair. Well has friendship
been rewarded.”"!"!
“You had been kept for the protection of our honour and dignity. But the traitors have robbed us of
these also, It is a matter of sorrow,” she continued, “that you did not weigh things before accusing me. You
have exiled me on the instigation of traitors. Whatever you have done has earned a good name for you. I
have lost my dignity and you have lost regard for your word. This treatment that you have given to me is not
given even to murderers. Having renounced everything, I had become a faqir, but you have not allowed me
to live even like a faqir.”!!?
The gentlemanly Lawrence was moved to pity, and possibly to shame, by such maternal pleas, but
Hardinge, who had motivated and taken full responsibility for her removal, was little more than cynical. “We
must expect these letters in various shapes, which a woman of her strong mind and passions will assume as
best suited either to gratify her vengeance or obtain her ends.””!'5
The installation of the Regency was thus a means to an end, in the words of Lord Hardinge, as he
wrote to Ellenborough on 23.1.1845, “Devouring an ally in adversity.”
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
CIRCUMSTANCES LEADING TO THE BATTLE OF CHILLIANWALA
And now we may give an account of citcumstances leading to the battle of Chillianwala and the final
annexation, in some detail.
With the banishment of Maharani Jindan from Punjab in May 1848, whom Lord Dalhousie, while
writing to Brigadier Mountain, on January 31,1849, described as being, ‘the only person having manly
understanding in the Punjab’, the stage for annexation was finally set by the British.
The Governor-General Sir Henry Hardinge on retirement and Sir Henry Lawrence on sick leave,
both returned to England together in January, 1848. They were replaced by the young lowland Scot, Lord
Dalhousie, then only 35, as Governor-General and by John Lawrence and later by Sir Currie as Resident.
Dalhousie expected his authority to be unquestioned as he wrote, “There can be only one master in all India
and while I am here I have no mind that it should be anybody else than the Governor-General in Council.”!"4
On assumption of office as Governor-General, he wrote in one of his official minutes, ‘In the exercise of a
wise and sound policy, the British Government is bound not to put aside or neglect such rightful
opportunities of acquiring territories or revenue, as may from time to time present themselves.’
Lord Hardinge had assured his successor, ‘It would not be necessary to fire a gun in India for seven
years to come.’ This wishful forecast was disproved within three months, when towards the end of April,
1848, the spark set off at Multan. A succession fee of Rs. 30 “kbs was demanded from Governor Mool Raj
and the annual revenue of the province of Multan was raised from about Rs. 20 Mkhs to Rs. 30 /akhs,
although his territory was reduced. Mool Raj resigned and Kahn Singh Mann was appointed Governor. Two
British Officers assisted him in taking over the charge. When on 19.4.1848 they were coming out of the fort,
an ugly incident took place, and the two British Officers were wounded and later killed in an assault by the
local troops. Thus did Mool Raj, driven by circumstances, rather than design, come to be placed at the head
of a local revolt.
Major Evans Bell, a contemporary of these events, in his The Annexation of the Punjab and Maharaja
Duleep Singh, (pp. 46-47) quoting extensively from The Blue Book Official Documents and other private papers
recotds, “Everything tends to prove that the original outbreak at Multan was equally unpremeditated. The
Diwan Mool Raj was rich, in infirm health and without children, timid, unpopular with the army and people;
and the Resident reports that immediately before the catastrophe he had ‘only five or six field guns’ and ‘had
discharged almost all his regular troops, preparatory to resigning his government.’ The attack on the two
British officers sent to relieve him of his post, was caused by a sudden impulse of discontent and fanaticism,
in the results of which, after a vain attempt to quell it, Mool Raj felt himself irretrievably compromised. With
hope of scant mercy from the British government and certain of death from the mutinous soldiery, if he
trusted to that mercy, he yielded to circumstances and accepted the lot that fate flung before him.”
It could be suppressed by timely action as strongly advocated by Herbert Edwardes, then Assistant to
the Lahore Resident, by deploying a little force. But this incident, the Governor-General, wanted to use as a
pretext and give it the appearance of a general rebellion by the Sikhs and then annex the state of Punjab.
Edwardes wrote on May 24,1848 to Major Hodson, the political Assistant of the Resident at Lahore:
“You express a hope in your letter that the British Government will act for itself, and not prop up a fallen dynasty. In
other words, you hope we shall seize the opportunity to annex the Punjab. In this I cannot agree with you, for I think, for all
that has yet happened, it would be both unjust and inexpedient. The treaty we made with the Sikh Government and people
cannot be forfeited by the treachery of a Gorkha regiment in Multan, the rebellion of a discharged Rardar or the treasonable
intrigues of the queen mother who has no connection with the Sikh Government of her son.”
He again wrote to the Resident on June 29,1848 :
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
‘I am afraid considerable mischief has been done by an idea of annexation getting abroad. It is my opinion that you
are certainly running a great and unnecessary risk in waiting for the cold weather, and giving the Sikh army the temptation to
rise, when by a mere march, the rebellion would now be settled.” He added, “T fancy the dodge is that all these senior officers
want to come marching up themselves at the head of Brigades and Divisions and don’t care two brass farthings whether Whish is
able or unable to maintain his position at Multan.’"'6
And again, after eleven days, he wrote : “T think it nill be most culpable supineness if we allow a rebellion,
which may be settled by a brigade or two, to rise again into a meet foe for the British army.’""’ When Lord Dalhousie
snubbed Edwardes for his criticism of ‘Policy of Delay’, in harsh and insulting words, Edwardes wrote back
to Currie, then Resident at Lahore, “I certainly did not expect to be insulted. He may command my services to their
fraction, but to his censure and praise, I feel indifferent for the future.”
Maharaja Dalip Singh was betrothed to the daughter of Sardar Chattar Singh Attariwala, then
Governor of Hazara in the North-West. Sardar Chattar Singh asked his son, Raja Sher Singh, who had been
sent alongwith others to suppress the so-called Multan revolt, to enquire from the Resident, through Herbert
Edwardes, his close friend, a firm date of the Maharaja’s marriage which the Resident was persistently
postponing for one reason or another. Edwardes, therefore, wrote, “The request seems strange at the present
moment. The secret motives of men are difficult to divine, but there can be no question that an opinion has
gone very prevalently abroad and been carefully disseminated by the evil disposed that the British meditate
declaring the Punjab forfeited by the recent troubles and misconduct of the troops.” He, therefore,
suggested, “It would, I think, be a wise and timely measure to give such assurance of British good faith and
intention to adhere to the Treaty, as would be involved in authoritative preparations for providing the young
ptince with a Queen. It would, no doubt, settle men’s minds greatly.”!!® The Governor-General Lord
Dalhousie, was greatly upset to read the suggestions and wrote to Sir Currie on 22.8.1848, ‘It would be a
friendly act if you or some of his well-wishers would point out to him that for an assistant to the Resident to
transmit to his Government a volunteer opinion that they would be guilty of breach of faith if they adopt a
particular policy, which the Governor-General of India, Her Majesty’s Ministers, and the Secret Committee,
all contemplate as probable, is hardly discreet, quite un-becoming and altogether unnecessary. I don’t intend
to take any notice of this and mention it privately to you because I wish well to Mr. Edwardes.”!!9 On the
other hand, Captain Abbot, the British representative at Hazara and a subordinate to Sardar Chattar Singh
Attartwala, excited the local Muslims against the Sardar and wrote to the Resident on 19.8.1848, “I on my
part, assembled the chiefs of Hazara, explained what had happened, and called upon them, by the memory of
their murdered parents, friends and relatives, to rise, and aid me in destroying the Sikh forces in detail. I
issued punvanas to this effect throughout the land and marched to a strong position.”’!?? Thus disappointed
and harassed, Sardar Chattar Singh wrote to his son, Raja Sher Singh, on 23.8.1848, “complaining bitterly of
Abbot, whose suspicions and treachery had driven him to adopt military measures to guard his life and
honour, and asked him to join in defending the family honour and independence of his country.’’!#! Raja Sher
Singh, therefore, decided to throw in his lot with the rebel leader Mool Raj of Multan.
Mool Raj didn’t trust Sher Singh and thought it was a ruse and, therefore, refused him admission to
the fort. Thus again disappointed, Sher Singh left Multan to meet his old father somewhere in the North-
West. Sardar Chattar Singh also left Hazara, captured Peshawar and Attock and wanted to reinforce the army
of Sher Singh. But luck willed it otherwise. He was still on his way, when the famous battle of Chillianwala
took place on 13.1.1849 between Raja Sher Singh and the British Commander-in-Chief, Lord Hugh Gough.
Major Evans Bell again succinctly records, “When Sardar Chattar Singh was fully committed beyond
all possibility of retreat or redemption — when redress was refused and he was sentenced without judgement
— his sons threw in their lot with their father, and the second Sikh war began. Until they took that step, the
Multan rebellion was isolated, — confined indeed, within the walls of the fortress; although its importance
was enhanced and dangers attending it were aggravated by the Maharani’s removal, by our military vacillation
and delay, and by the rumour of impending annexation. Upto the middle of September 1848, no Chief of
note or distinction had joined the insurrection. Capt. Abbot’s notion of a general conspiracy throughout the
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Punjab, in which all the members of the Durbar and Gulab Singh Dogtra of Kashmir were implicated, as well
as his charge against Sardar Chattar Singh of having been accessory before the fact to the Multan outbreak,
are conclusively disproved by the dates and incidents of each successive convulsion.” (p. 43)
The Governor-General wrote to the Resident on 8.10.1848, “The rebellion of Raja Sher Singh,
followed by his army, the rebellion of Sardar Chattar Singh with the Darbar army under his command, the
state of the troops and of the Sikh population everywhere, have brought matters to that crisis, I have for
months been looking for, and we are now not on the eve but in the midst of war with the Sikh nation and the
kingdom of the Punjab.”!22
The Resident wrote to the Governor-General on 12.10.1848, “Now if that be the case, I with my
assistants, am in an anomalous position, as superintending and aiding the administration of the Lahore State
and if I were to withdraw from the Government and to declare the Treaty violated and all amicable relations
between the two States an end, we should have the whole country up at once as one man to destroy us, if
possible. There is no doubt that all, with a very few exceptions, are, at this time, chiefs, army and people,
inimical, aye hostile to us in their hearts and desire to get rid of us.”’!?> He, therefore, suggested, “This
declaration regarding the ‘State of Lahore being directly at war with the British Government’ should not be
made till the Commander-in-Chief is in a commanding attitude at Lahore ...... I think the declaration to be
made by the Government should be to the purport ...... setting forth that the British Government will now
occupy the Punjab Province ...... that all consideration will be paid to the interests of Maharaja Duleep Singh
who, from his tender years, cannot be held personally responsible for the misconduct of Lahore State ...... I
think in the first instance nothing more explicit of the Government intentions need be proclaimed, and that
this proclamation should not be made till we are in circumstances to follow it up ...... I think we may quietly
annex the Punjab districts to the British Provinces, making a suitable provision for the state and comfort of
Maharaja Duleep Singh.”!*4
A grand army was then constituted at Ferozepur in November, 1848 and the Commander-in-Chief,
Lord Gough, reached Lahore on 13th November, and three days later on the right bank of Chenab where
Raja Sher Singh’s army was then encamped. In the absence of any declaration of war by the British, “It was
not till after leaving Lahore that Lord Gough came to know that the war was to be against and not in support
of the Darbar.” He, therefore, wrote on 15.11.1848, “I do not know whether we are at peace or war, or who
is it we are fighting for.’”’!?5 At long last a proclamation was addressed to all loyal subjects of the Maharaja to
assure them that the British had come not as an enemy to the Constituted Government, but to restore order
and obedience.
THE BATTLE OF CHILLIANWALA
The Commander-in-Chief Lord Hugh Gough, who had enough experience of the Sikh valour at
Ferozeshah and Sabraon, felt nervous and stuck to his camp for five weeks only ten miles away from that of
Raja Sher Singh. It was a period of inaction on both sides. According to Burton, “Lord Gough was himself
of the opinion that he was not strong enough, and that it would be best to await the fall of Multan, which
would release the troops there engaged, before attacking the Sikhs.’”!?° But the news of fall of Peshawar and
Attock to Sardar Chattar Singh had reached the British Camp and the Commander-in-Chief was forced by the
Governor-General to engage Sher Singh before he was reinforced by the army of his father. Thus, Lord
Gough, assisted by the Darbar troops and Jammu soldiers under Colonel Steinbach, moved up on 13.1.1849
and was received by the Sikh artillery under General Ilahi Bakhsh.
Chillianwala was one of the hardest-fought battles. There was a feeling of consternation, both in
British India and in England, over the battle of Chillianwala which was considered to be a disaster worse than
that in Afghanistan, as more than three thousand British lay dead or wounded in the ravines and brushwood,
and the camp was overspread with a funeral gloom. “Chillianwala was not a victory,” says Dr Adams.
“When the news of Chillianwala reached England, the nation was stricken with profound emotion. A long
series of military successes had ill fitted it to hear with composure of British guns and British standards taken,
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
of British cavalry flying before the enemy, and of a British army scarcely able by the most desperate exertions
to snatch a victory from a wild Indian people. It was felt that our fame and influence in India had undergone
a heavy blow; and a disaster was attributed very generally to the blunders of the Commander-in-Chief.”!2”
The battle paralyzed Lord Gough, and Lord Dalhousie lost confidence in him. Writing to Sit John Hobhouse
on 21.2.1849, the Governor-General said, “If he again fights an incomplete action with terrible carnage as
before, you must expect of my taking a strong step; he shall not remain in command of that army in the
field.””!28 The Times of London woefully declared that Lord Gough was playing with the lives of our soldiers.!?°
Sit John Hobhouse, the President of the Board of Directors, observed on March 7, 1849, “The disaster has
thrown the success into the shade and the impression made upon the public mind is stronger than that
caused by the Kabul Massacre. The result has been that in eight-and-forty hours after the arrival of the mail,
it was determined to send Sir Charles Napier to command the Indian Army.’ Even the eighty year old
Duke of Wellington, conqueror of Napoleon, offered to go out to India to fight against the Sikhs, if Napier
hesitated. He said to the latter, “If you do not go, I must.’’3! The English poet, George Meredith wrote a
poem in commemoration of the battle :
Chilianwallah, Chillhianwallah !
When the night set in with rain,
Came the savage plundering devils
To their work among the slain;
And the wounded and the dying
In cold blood did share the doom
Of their comrades round them lying,
Stiff in, the dead skyless gloom.
The British Subaltern wrote, “The Sikhs fought like devils ...... Such a mass of men I never set eye
on and as plucky as lions they ran right on the bayonets of the 21st. (Regiment) and struck at their assailants
when they were transfixed.”’!?
Kapur Singh records, “When the remnants of Sikh soldiers, without any backing from their state,
challenged in battle the British army at Chillianwala on 13th January, 1849, the rout of British was so decisive
and complete that even patriotic British historians are obliged to admit that they were defeated. The great
grand-father of the writer of these lines, who fought in this battle, used to narrate that the Sikhs, for full
twelve hours pursued the scattered British soldiers in all directions, who when overtaken would fall on their
knees to beg for mercy, saying “ham tumbara gat’ ( I am like a defenseless cow to you), on the sight of a Sikh
soldier.’’!33
Even Sir Winston Churchill, after describing the Afghan massacre in 1841, records, “Another defeat
(Chillianwala) soon followed in the Punjab, the most northernly state of Indian provinces.’ !34
Next morning Sikh guns boomed a twenty-one gun salute to their victory. The British also claimed
the battle as a victory. However, writing secretly to the Duke of Wellington on 22.1.1949 Lord Dalhousie
said, “In public I make, of course, the best of things, I treat it as a great victory. But writing confidentially to
you I do not hesitate to say that I consider my position grave.”
LOSS OF BATTLE OF GUJRAT AND ANNEXATION
Mool Raj having got his magazine in the fort containing 400,000 Ibs. of gun powder blown up by a
shell from the besieging troops, became helpless and surrendered on 22.1.1849 at Multan to General Whish,
who was assisted by the Darbar troops. And Raja Sher Singh who had three horses killed under him in this
action, lost the battle of Gujrat on 21.2.1849. Writing about this battle, General Thackwell, who was present,
wrote, “In this action as well as at Chillianwala, Sikhs caught hold of the bayonets of their assailants with their
left hands and closing with their adversaries, dealt furious sword blows with their right. This circumstance
alone will suffice to demonstrate the rare species of courage possessed by these men.”!°5 He added, “The
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
fidelity displayed by the Sikh gunners is worthy of record: the devotion with which they remained at their
posts, when the atmosphere around them was absolutely fired by the British guns, does not admit
description.” 136
The fight at Gujrat was a disaster though, the coup de grace was, however, delivered again by the Arch
Traitor, Gulab Singh Dogra. He helped Abbot to cut off Sher Singh Attariwala’s retreat towards the frontier.
The prospect of continuing the fight with Afghan help was thus obviated. He also arranged for the supply of
boats for the British Army to cross the Jhelum. Thus driven by adverse circumstances, the Attartwalas, both
father and son, came to the British Camp with their faces covered under their shawls and formally
suttendered their swords to General Gilbert at Hurmuck on March 11,1849. Three days later, the Sikh
soldiers with tears in their eyes, kissed their swords and laid down their arms. General Thackwell has again
vividly described the scene, “The reluctance of some of the old Khalsa veterans to surrender their arms was
evident. Some could not restrain their tears, while on the faces of others, rage and hatred were visibly
depicted.” The remark of one grey-bearded veteran as he put down his gun summed up the history of the
Punjab : £47 Ranjit Singh mar gaya (today Ranjit Singh has died).’”’!37
HENRY LAWRENCE NOT ALLOWED TO ACT IN PUBLIC CAPACITY
Henry Lawrence had returned to England on long sick leave on 18.1.1848. When he heard of the
Multan rebellion, Lawrence got his remaining leave cancelled, landed at Bombay and reached Multan, hoping
to conciliate Mool Raj. While there, he was prevented from acting in any public capacity under instructions
from Lord Dalhousie. He received a letter from Currie, then Resident at Lahore, which said, “There are
strong rumours that if you should arrive anywhere near Multan, Diwan Mool Raj means to surrender to you.
I have no doubt whatever that you would not receive him.”!* Thus Lawrence reached Lahore in the first
week of January, 1849, after staying at Multan for two days only, and resumed his charge as Resident on
1.2.1849. He drew up a proclamation to be issued on conclusion of the Multan affair, and submitted it to
Lord Dalhousie for approval. It was in accordance with the practice, policy and tone in force under Lord
Hardinge. But Dalhousie found them utterly unsatisfactory and conveyed his rejection in harsh and
unbecoming language, to which Sir Lawrence replied in a dignified tone on 5.2.1849, “My own opinion, as
more than once expressed to your Lordship in writing, is against annexation. I did think it unjust; I now
consider it impolitic. It is quite possible I may be prejudiced and blinded, but I have thought over the subject
long and carefully.”’!°
THE FINAL TRANSACTION
Thus finding Sir Henry Lawrence unhelpful in his designs of annexation, Lord Dalhousie selected his
Foreign Secretary, Elliot, for the final transaction. How he managed this delicate task, Elliot himself
describes in his report of March 29,1849, “Immediately on my arrival, I communicated to Sir Henry
Lawrence and John Lawrence the instructions with which I was charged, and regretted to find that both these
officers were fully persuaded that the Council of Regency would, on no account, be induced to accede to the
terms which were offered for their acceptance, in as much as they had already incurred great odium amongst
their countrymen for what were considered to be their former concessions.” !4°
Elliot was disheartened at first, but his resourcefulness did not fail him. He then hit upon the more
artful device of working separately on the personal interests of each member of the Council and studying
their reaction. He requested Henry Lawrence immediately to send for the two most influential members of
the council as he wanted to talk to them. Raja Tej Singh and Diwan Dina Nath were accordingly summoned.
The Raja at first excused himself on the ground of sickness. But the messenger was sent again and was told
to inform him that the mission on which Sir Henry Elliot had come was urgent and could not be
accomplished without him, so he should come to the Residency unless he was really very seriously ill. Upon
this Tej Singh came. His looks, Elliot’s report states, gave no warrant for his excuses. Diwan Dina Nath
came with him.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
How the talks went on and ended is again explicitly stated in Mr. Elliot’s report. He writes: “7
explained to them the purpose for which I had come, that the Punjab would be annexed to the British dominions at all events,
but that it was for them to decide whether this should be done in an unqualified manner, or whether they would subscribe to the
conditions which I was about to lay before them.’
“The Rajah opened out in a strain of invective against Sher Singh and all the rebellious Sardars acknowledged that the
British Government had acquired a perfect right to dispose of the country as it saw fit, and recommended that it should declare its
nill without calling upon the Council to sign any conditions. I replied that if they refused to accept the terms, which the
Governor-General offered, the Maharaja and themselves would be entirely at his mercy, and I had no authority to say that they
would be entitled to receive any allowance whatever.’\*2
“The Diwan commented on the severity of the conditions and particularly on the exile of the Maharaja. I promised
that the Maharaja should not be sent anywhere to the east of the Ganges, pointing out Hardwar, Garhmukteswar, Bithoor, and
Allahabad as being all of them places of high sanctity in their religion. They seemed to be thankful for this as a concession ......
they seemed fully satisfied with the personal allowance assigned to the Maharaja, which I told them would be about 10,000
Rupees per mensem.?**
“Other subjects were then discussed, and they enquired anxiously about their own future position; I told them it was not
intended to deprive them of their jagirs or salaries, and that, for this indulgence they would be expected to yield the British
Government the benefit of their advice and assistance whenever called upon to do so, that if they did not subscribe to the
conditions, I could not promise that any consideration would be shown to them.” \4
“After much more parley, during which ...... I convinced them of my resolute determination to yield to no point, they
expressed their willingness to sign the paper, and signed it accordingly, not without evident sorrow and repugnance on the part of
the Diwan.”
Having succeeded with Tej Singh and Dina Nath, Elliot next summoned Bhai Nidhan Singh and
Pakir Nur-ud-Din, the only other members of the regency Council who were residing in Lahore at the
moment. Nidhan Singh was the doyen of the celebrated priestly family of Bhai Basti Ram, and Fakir Nur-ud
Din that of the most influential Muhammadan family of Lahore. “When they came and were told what had
passed,” writes Sir Henry Elliot, “they said they would abide by whatever their colleagues were prepared to
do. They then affixed their seal and signatures to the paper in duplicate and Sir Henry Lawrence and myself
then added our counter-signatures. The members then took their leave after the conference had lasted about
two hours.” The remaining two members of the Regency Council, namely, Sardar Shamsher Singh
Sandhanwalia and Sardar Attar Singh Kalianwala not being present in Lahore, their accredited agents (vak7/s)
signed the documents on their behalf. The question of the dissolution of the kingdom of the Sikhs and of
the confiscation of its property including the world famous gem Koh-i-Noor, was thus finally decided, and
agreed upon.
That the destiny of a ruling Prince and of his twenty million subjects should have been decided by
four of his timid and selfish councillors and this, too, within the brief space, of two hours, is one of the very
grim facts of history. Even the deal over the sale of a flock of sheep, between a shepherd and a butcher,
perhaps, takes longer time than was taken by Mr. Elliot and Raja Tej Singh and Co, in making over to the
British, the fortunes of the two crores of people of the Punjab.
PROCLAMATION OF MARCH 29, 1849 AND THE ANNEXATION
All that now remained to be done was the formal ratification of this business by the minor Prince
and Mr. Elliot, which the latter desired should be done in a public Darbar. A Darbar was accordingly
arranged for the next morning, viz. 29th March at 7 A.M. At the appointed, hour Sir Henry Elliot arrived at
the Darbar Hall accompanied by the Lawrences (John and Henry) and other officials of the Residency. The
party was escorted by a squadron of the Governor-General’s bodyguard which Lord Dalhousie had specially
sent for the occasion from his Ferozepore Camp. The Darbar Hall in the Lahore Fort was suitably decorated,
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
English and Indian spectators lining the walls on either side. The Maharaja and his Ministers who were
waiting at the gate of the citadel to receive the Governor-General’s representative, then joined the small
cavalcade which together moved to the audience hall. The boy-king was conducted to the throne at the end
of the Hall (being the last time he occupied this seat) and the British envoys with the members of the
Regency Council sat on either side. A deep silence prevailed in the Hall. The proceedings began with the
reading aloud of the fatal ‘edict’ in English by Henry Elliot, which said, “The British have faithfully kept their
word and have scrupulously observed every obligation which the treaties imposed upon them. But the Sikh
people and their Chiefs have, on their part, grossly and faithlessly violated the promises by which they were
bound. Finally, the army of the state, and the whole Sikh people, joined by many of the Sardars in the Punjab,
who signed the treaties, and led by a member of the Regency itself have risen in arms against us and have
waged a fierce and bloody war, for the proclaimed purpose of destroying the British and their power.” !4¢
Upon the conclusion of the Manifesto, the paper was passed on by the Chief Minister, Raja Tej
Singh, to the Maharaja who affixed his signature “by tracing the initials of his name in English letters.” This
completed the ratification of that farcical transaction which formally and finally transformed the sovereign
state of the Punjab into a British province and its ruler, Duleep Singh, into a throneless pensioner of the
British Government. Elliot concludes his report with a feeling of pride and exultation over his achievement.
“As I left the place,” says he, “I had the proud satisfaction of seeing the British colours hoisted on the citadel
under a royal salute from our own artillery, at once proclaiming the ascendancy of British rule, and sounding
the knell of the Khalsa Raj.”!47
FULL CO-OPERATION OF THE PEOPLE AND LAHORE DARBAR
Thus, despite Henry Lawrence’s threats to resign, the British succeeded in their plans of annexation
of the Punjab on the flimsy ground of Sikh rebellion. Otherwise the troops commanded by General
Gortlandt, Sardar Fateh Singh, Missar Sahib Dyal, Diwan Jawahar Mal, Shaikh Imam-ud-Din, Sardar Jhanda
Singh, Colonel Bhup Singh, Colonel Bahadur Singh, Colonel Budh Singh, Babu Pandey, Colonel Nur-ud-Din,
General Sultan Mahmood, and other military Officers, remained faithful and obedient to Lieutenants
Edwardes and Lake, and Captains Abbot and Nicholson in accordance with the orders of the Lahore Darbar.
As late as November 15, when the British Commander-in-Chief, Lord Gough, had entered the Punjab
territories and was encamped at the capital of the state, the Lahore Darbar, as desired by the British Resident,
ordered two of its chief officers, Sardar Boor Singh and Diwan Kishan Lal, to accompany and guide the
Commander-in-Chief and his force to Ram Nagar (against Raja Sher Singh), to look after their comforts and
supply them with food and fodder.
There was no rising either of the army or the people in the central Sikh districts of the State; not a
single British Officer was attacked or molested. The British Resident continued to stay at the capital of the
kingdom, issuing orders to the Council of Regency, the Darbar, and receiving their fullest co-operation. Only
one member of the Regency, out of eight, Raja Sher Singh, had joined the rebels and that too, as a result of
Captain Abbot’s mean instigations and provocations against his father Sardar Chattar Singh, then Governor
of Hazara, and his family. The remaining members were perfectly faithful and obedient. In addition to the
great majority of the army who took no part in the revolt, “at least 20,000 subjects of the Lahore State,”
according to Major Bell, “enrolled in its service, fought on the side of the Government, and assisted in
suppressing the rebellion, not knowing that at the end of it, their country would be annexed and permanently
occupied by the British Government.’’!48
TREATIES VIOLATED BY THE BRITISH
Major Bell adds, “Having conducted the administration of the Lahore State for two years and three months ...... by
means of his own Agent and his own nominees, in the name of his Ward and Ally, the Maharaja, under a treaty which he
upholds and enforces to the last, he (Lord Dalhousie) turns round, when the rebellion is over, declares the Treaty to have been
violated, and therefore null and void, and explains that the successful campaign, ostensibly carried on for the suppression of a
rebellion against the Government of Maharaja Duleep Singh, really constituted a war against the Maharaja and the State of
Lahore, by which the British Government has ‘conquered’ the Punjab’(Retros. and Pros. of Ind. Policy,157-8).! “But
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
during the period prescribed by the treaty for the Maharaja’s minority, no crisis, no second struggle, could absolve the British
Government from the obligations of guardianship and management, so long as it professed to fulfil those duties, and was able to
do so without interruption” (bid., 152-3), Lord Dalhousie has, as such, ‘violated treaties, abused a sacred trust..and
(made) an acquisition as unjust as it was imprudent ...... This, I believe, will be the verdict of posterity and history, upon the
transactions which have just passed under our review” (Ibid.,179) 1°
“This is perhaps the first instance on record in which a guardian has visited his own misdeeds upon his ward,” says
John Sullivan. “The British Government was the self-constituted guardian of the Raja and the regent of his kingdom, a
rebellion was provoked by the agents of the guardian, it was acknowledged by the guardian to be a rebellion against the
government of bis ward, and the guardian punished that ward by confiscating his dominions and his diamonds to his own use.”
(Are We Bound by our Treaties, p. 52)'9!
According to John M. Ludlow: “Duleep Singh was an infant; his minority was only to end in 1854. We were
his declared protectors. On our last advance into his country, we had proclaimed (18th Nov., 1848) that we came to punish
insurgents, and to put down all armed opposition to constituted authority. We fulfilled that pledge by annexing his whole country
within six months.’
“The duty of a Lord Paramount is to protect, and we assume this title with a view to destroy. We are bound by
treaties to ‘protect’ the states, which we are now employed in annihilating.” (Ubid., p. 54). “The verdict against us must be, that
in matters Oriental this nation has no conscience.” (Ibid., 78).1%°
In the words of William S.R. Hodson, “AV/ our history shows that sooner or later connection with us is political
death. The sunshine is not more fatal to a dew-drop than our friendship or alliance to an Asiatic kingdom.” (Trotter,
Hodson of Hodson’s Horse, p. 150).154
In utter contrast, one is sadly reminded of the chivalrous standards of yore in the field of battle.
Alexander the Great is said to have spurned the suggestion of a surprise night attack in the battle of Albela
against King Darius of Persia in 331 B.C. remarking, “No, I will not steal a victory.”!5 But it is pretty clear
that the British during their battles in India heartlessly employed low conspiracy, vile treachery and rank
betrayal more than the noble principles of warfare, in founding and consolidating an eastern empire.
DALHOUSIE’S PATHETIC CONFESSION OF MORAL GUILT
But Lord Dalhousie was indifferent to what history might record. He never perhaps realised to what
a pitiable condition he had reduced the ten-year old innocent fatherless boy, Maharaja Duleep Singh, forcibly
separated from his mother at the age of nine and heartlessly driven out of his kingdom, until, with the death
of his (Dalhousie’s) wife, his own children were rendered motherless, though not fatherless. Writing to
Colonel Mountain in the last week of June,1853, after the death of Lady Dalhousie on the 13th, he said :
“God, and those on whom he places it, alone can tell how heavy it is and how hard to bear this burden and every
circumstance both to me and to her poor children that could sharpen the anguish of such a lash has been added. I try to submit
and I hope I may.’">°
Dalhousie added :
“God's ways are not as our ways. It is no right of ours to enquire His reasons. If we had such right, I should be quick
to admit that He had abundant cause, if it seemed to Him good, to inflict this punishment and chastisement upon me.”'57 But
alas, this realisation had come all too late.
CONFISCATION OF LAHORE TOSHAKHANA
The first important act of Lord Dalhousie after annexation was the confiscation of property in the
Lahore Toshakhana. In addition to jewels and treasures in gold, silver, and precious stones, dishes, plates,
cups, cooking pots, many valuable curiosities and relics of all kinds and vast store of Kashmir shawls, chogas,
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
etc., and the swords of Persian hero Rustam and Wazir Fateh Khan Barakzai of Kabul and the wedding
garments of Sardar Mahan Singh, father of Maharaja Ranjit Singh, there were :
(a) The Aalghi or aigrette of Guru Gobind Singh,
(b) The Koh-i-Noor diamond,
(c) Maharaja Ranjit Singh’s golden chair, silver summer house, gold and silver poled tents and
equipage of rich Cashmere and his magnificient arms and armour.
(d) Shah Shuja’s pavilion, gorgeously embroidered.'58
On November 28,1849, Lord Dalhousie inspected the Toshakhana articles and decided not only on
the sale of most of the property, but also on the removal of certain valuables to England for presentation to
the Queen and for preservation in official museums there. The Maharaja was allowed to take with him only a
very small part of his things to Fatehgarh in the United Provinces, where he was removed in February, 1850.
Thus we have seen, how fraudulently the Punjab lost its independence, which it had won after eight
weaty centuries of foreign rule, by going through numberless holocausts for nearly a century by the virile
young Sikh nation and how the eleven year old innocent Maharaja Duleep Singh was deprived not only of a
magnificient kingdom, but also of such national and personal unique marvels as the ka/ghi of Guru Gobind
Singh, the matchless jewel Koh-i-Noor, along with many other world famous marvels and even the wedding
garments of his grandfather, the great Sardar Mahan Singh.
These gory and machiavellian episodes bring to mind the maxim in his, The Kingdom of God (pp. 25-
26) quoted from the Book of Faith by the saintly Tolstoy, “Christ by means of his disciples caught the whole
world in his net of faith, but the big fish burst the net and escaped from it, and through the holes they made
the other fish got out so that the net has been left almost empty. The big fish that burst the net are the rulers,
emperors, popes and kings, who without renouncing power, accepted not Christianity but only its mask.”
There can be no better finale to this blood-dripping tale than what Sita Ram Kohli, the doyen of
Punjab historians, has given to his Swnset of Sikh Empire.
“How inscrutable is the way of the working of destiny! Could any English statesman at that time
imagine that within ten decades his people would also have to wind up their empire and erase the red from
the political maps of Asia and Africa. So turns the cycle of Time. Verily has a Persian poet observed :
Dar en wurta kashti fro sudd bazar
Ki paeda na shudd takhta ra ba Rkinar
In the whirpool of time, thousands of boats were drawn in and sank. Not a plank (splinter) of any
one of them came up to the surface, to tell its sad tale.
Again,
Ale Sikander na rehi teri bhi alamgiri
Kitne din aap jiya kis liye Dara Mara.
O Alexander the Great, even your dream of world hegemony didn’t last long. Why then didst thou
kill Dartus ? For you yourself lived only for a short while.”
One wonders, then, if the present-day so-called modern governments, with evil designs and wicked
machinations would ever take a leaf out of this universal truth.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
REFERENCES
1s Lt. General Kaul, The Untold Story.
2: Gurtej Singh, Recent Researches in Sikhism, Punjabi University Patiala, 1992, p. 62.
S. Ganda Singh, The British Occupation of the Punjab, Sikh History Society, Amritsar, Patiala, 1955,
p. 81.
4, Sit Jadu Nath Sarkar, Hastory of Aurangzeb, Vol. IN, Orient Longman Ltd., 1972, pp. 164,
174.
5 Hari Ram Gupta, History of Sikh Gurus, U.C. Kapur and Sons, New Delhi, 1973, pp. 1, 18.
6. N.K. Sinha, Ranjit Singh, UII Edition, p. 2.
7. Prof. Stanley Wolpert, A New History of India, Oxford University, 1982, p. 2106.
8 R.R. Sethi & V.D. Mahajan, India Since 1526, 8. Chand & Co. Delhi, 1957, p. 28.
9 Sit Penderel Moon, Strangers in India, Gteenwood Press, Publishers, Westport, Connecticut,
US.A., 1971, p. 12.
10. Ganda Singh (ed.), History of the Freedom Movement in the Punjab, Vol. III, Punjabi University,
Patiala, 1977.
11. Ibid., p. 6.
12. Hari Ram Gupta, Punjab, Central Asia, and the First Afghan War, Panjab University,
Chandigarh, 1987, p. (vii)
13. Sit John Kaye, Lives of Indian Officers, Vol. TI, A. Strahan and Co. Ludgate Hill, London,
1867, pp. 17-18.
14. Ganda Singh (ed.), Héstory of the Freedom Movement in the Punjab, op. cit., p. 69.
hd. Karnail Singh, Angl-Sikh Wars, $.G.P.C., Amritsar, 1984, p. 3.
16. Sit Herbert Edwards and Merivale, Life of Sir Henry Lawrence, Vol. 1, Smith Elder & Co., 15
Waterloo Place, London, 1872, pp. 267-68.
17. Ibid., pp. 365-67.
18. Ibid., pp. 365-77.
19. Ibid., p. 371.
20. Ganda Singh (ed.), Hestory of the Freedom Movement in the Punjab, op. cit., p. 15.
21. Ibid., p. 15.
22. Ibid., pp. 14-15.
23. Cunningham, J. D., A Hastory of the Sikhs, (ed.) H.L.O. Garret., S. Chand & Co., Delhi, 1955,
p. 227.
24. Ganda Singh, The British Occupation of the Punjab, op. cit., pp. 31, 35.
25. Ibid., pp. 32-33.
26. Cunningham, J. D., A Hastory of the Sikhs, (ed.) H.L.O. Garret., S. Chand & Co., Delhi, 1955,
p. 227.
27. Sita Ram Kohli, Swnset of the Sikh Empire, (ed.) Khushwant Singh, Orient Longmans, New
Delhi, 1967, p. 41.
28. Ganda Singh (ed.), History of the Freedom Movement in the Punjab, op. cit., pp. 18-19.
29. Hari Ram Gupta, Panjab on the Eve of First Sikh War, Panjab University, Chandigarh, 1975,
pp. 60-61.
30. General Sir Charles Gough and Arthur D. Innes, The Sikhs and the Sikh Wars, Language
Department, Punjab, 1970, p. 50.
31. Cunningham, J. D., A Hastory of the Sikhs, (ed.) H.L.O. Garret., S. Chand & Co., Delhi, 1955,
p. 227.
32. Sita Ram Kohli, op. cit., p. 47.
33; Ibid., p. 74.
34. Karnail Singh, op. cit., p. 21.
35. Kapur Singh, Parasara Prasna (ed.), Piar Singh and Madanjit Kaur, Guru Nanak Dev
University, Amritsar, 1989, p. 224.
36. Ganda Singh (ed.), Héstory of the Freedom Movement in the Punjab, op. cit., p. 19.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
37. Ibid., p. 23.
38. Ibid., p. 24.
39. Ibid., p. 25.
40. Ibid., p. 25.
41. Ibid., p. 25.
42. Ibid., p. 25.
43, Ibid., p. 25.
44. Ibid., p. 26.
45. Ibid., p. 27.
46. Ibid., p. 27-28.
47. Ibid., p. 28.
48. Ibid., p. 31.
49. Ibid., p. 31.
50. Cunningham, J. D. op. cit., p. 255.
51. Ganda Singh, The British Occupation of the Punjab, op. cit, p. 68.
52. Cunningham, J. D. op. cit, p. 257.
53. Sita Ram Kohli, Sewa Singh Giani (ed.), Var Shah Mobd. Jang Hind-Punjab, Punjabi Sahit
Academy, Ludhiana, 1988, p. 60.
54. Ganda Singh (ed.), Héstory of the Freedom Movement in the Punjab, op. cit., p. 69.
55. Ibid., p. 69.
56. MLL. Ahluwalia and Kirpal Singh, Te Punjab’s Pioneer Freedom Fighters, Orient Longmans Ltd.,
New Delhi, 1963, pp. 83-84, F.N. 4.
57. Ganda Singh (ed.), Hastory of the Freedom Movement in the Punjab, op. cit., p. 30.
58. Ganda Singh, The British Occupation of the Punjab, op. cit, p. 60.
Doe Ibid., p. 60.
60. Ibid p. 77.
61. Ganda Singh (ed.), History of the Freedom Movement in the Punjab, op. cit., p. 38.
62. Ibid., p. 33-34.
63. Ibid., p. 42.
64. Cunningham, J. D. op. cit., p. 263.
65. Ganda Singh, The British Occupation of the Punjab, op. cit., pp. 77-78.
66. Ibid., p. 79.
67. Cunningham, J. D. op. cit., p. 264.
68. Ibid., p. 265.
69. Sita Ram Kohli, Sunset of the Sikh Empire, op. cit., p. 109.
70. Cunningham, J. D. op. cit., p. 266.
71. Ibid., p. 267.
72. MLL. Ahluwalia and Kirpal Singh, op. cit., pp. 21-22.
73. Ganda Singh, The British Occupation of the Punjab, op. cit., pp. 81.
74. Ibid., p. 81.
7D. Ibid., p. 82.
76. Cunningham, J. D. op. cit., p. 263 F.N. 1.
77. M. L. Ahluwalia and Kirpal Singh, op. cit., p. 8.
78. Ibid., p. 23.
79. Cunningham, J. D. op. cit., p. 281.
80. Ibid., p. 281.
81. M. L. Ahluwalia and Kirpal Singh, op. cit., p. 26.
82. Ibid., p. 27.
83. Cunningham, J. D. op. cit., p. 282.
84. Kapur Singh, Parasara Prasna op. cit., pp. 248-249.
85. Ganda Singh, The British Occupation of the Punjab, op. cit., pp. 89.
86. The Life and Campaigns of Viscount Gough, p. 108.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
87. Dr Ganda Singh, (ed.) The First Anglo-Sikh War (1845-46). Panjab Past and Present, Serial
No. 29, April 1981, p. 127
88. Cunningham, J. D. op. cit., p. 284.
89. M. L. Ahluwalia and Kirpal Singh, op. cit., p. 28.
90. Sita Ram Kohli, op. cit., p. 117.
91. Kapur Singh, op. cit., p. 246.
92. Ibid., p. 115 and 118.
93. Ibid., p. 118.
94. Cunningham, J. D. op. cit., p. 288.
95. Ganda Singh, The British Occupation of the Punjab, op. cit., pp. 95.
96. Ibid., p. 95.
97. Ibid., p. 95.
98. Ibid., p. 95-96.
99. Sita Ram Kohli, op. cit., p. 128.
100. Ibid., p. 129.
101. Ibid, p. 129.
102. Ibid, pp. 129-130.
103. Ibid., pp. 130-131.
104. Ibid. p. 131.
105. — Ibid., p. 131.
106. Ganda Singh (ed.), History of the Freedom Movement in the Punjab, op. cit., p. 50.
107. Ibid., p. 50.
108. — Ibid., p. 50.
109. Ibid., p. 55.
110. Ibid., p. 51-52.
111. Ibid., p. 100.
112. Ibid., p. 100.
113. Michael Alexander and Sushila Anand, Oueen Victoria’s Maharaja Duleep Singh,Vikas Publishing
House, N. Delhi, 1979, p. 8.
114. Ibid., p. 9.
115. Ganda Singh, The British Occupation of the Punjab, op. cit., pp. 115.
116. — Ibid, p. 115-116.
117. Ibid., p. 115.
118. Ibid., p. 120.
119. Tbid., p. 120-21.
120. Ibid., p. 123.
121. — Tbid., p. 127.
122. Ibid, p. 129.
123. Ibid., p. 129.
124. Ibid, p. 130.
125. Ibid, p. 132.
126. — Ibid., p. 133.
127. Ibid., p. 133-34.
128. Ibid, p. 134.
129. Ibid, p. 134.
130. Ibid., p. 134.
131. Ibid., p. 134.
132. Sita Ram Kohli, op. cit., p. 175.
133. Kapur Singh, Parasara Prasna op. cit., p. 249.
134. = Sir Winston Churchill, Hestory of the English Speaking Peoples, Vol. IV, Cassel and Co. Ltd.,
London,1962, p. 65.
135. Sita Ram Kohli, op. cit., p. 178.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
136. Ibid. p. 178.
137. Ibid., p. 179.
138. Ganda Singh (ed.), History of the Freedom Movement in the Punjab, op. cit., p. 66.
139. Ibid., p. 131.
140. Sita Ram Kohli, op. cit., pp. 180-181.
141. Ibid., p. 181.
142. — Ibid., p. 181.
143. Ibid., pp. 181-182.
144. Ibid., p. 182.
145. Ibid., p. 182.
146. Ganda Singh (ed.), History of the Freedom Movement in the Punjab, op. cit., p. 68.
147. Sita Ram Kohli, op. cit., p. 184.
148. Ganda Singh, The British Occupation of the Punjab, op. cit., pp. 147-148.
149. Ganda Singh (ed.), History of the Freedom Movement in the Punjab, op. cit., p. 75.
150. Ibid., pp. 76-77.
151. Ibid, p. 76.
152. Ibid, p. 76.
153. Ibid, p. 76.
154. Ibid., p. 77.
155. Kapur Singh, Parasaraprasna, op. cit., p. 223.
156. Ganda Singh, The British Occupation of the Punjab, op. cit., p. 150.
157. Ibid., p. 150.
158. John Login and Maharaja Duleep Singh, pp. 182-83.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
29
SINGH SABHA MOVEMENT — A REVIVAL
GURDARSHAN SINGH DHILLON
INTRODUCTION
In recent years some writings have appeared, which suggest that the Singh Sabha Movement was a
reformist movement that made innovations in Sikh thought and practices. Academically speaking, the
method to determine whether a religious movement (Singh Sabha in this case) is reformist or revivalist, is to
study four aspects of it. The first aspect is the ideology of the original movement (Sikhism), and especially
whether the movement under study created changes in that ideology, or only invoked the original ideology of
the system to bring about changes in the then existing practices. Second is the level of achievement in
practices which the original movement (Sikh religion in this case), had made during its hey day and whether
the leaders of the movement under study had invoked those achievements and the tradition as a model to
follow. Thirdly, what was the fall, if any, in the state of things in the life of the community that was sought to
be changed, and how it measured with the earlier high mark of the tradition, 1e., what was the then state of
affairs and practices that were sought to be changed. Fourthly, how the changes brought about by the leaders
of the new movement (Singh Sabha in this case) compare with the earlier tradition, and whether or not those
were in consonance with it or entirely variant from it.
We are dividing our present paper into four parts so as to make a proper assessment of the Singh
Sabha Movement. Side by side we shall be considering some variant views in the light of our discussion of
the subject. We shall first state the fundamentals of the Sikh ideology, especially those where Sikhism
radically departed from the earlier Indian traditions.
SIKH IDEOLOGY
Sikhism arose in the 16th century as an entirely new ideology, opposed in its fundamentals to those
of the contemporary religions. It challenged fanaticism and religious hypocrisy of the Brahmins and political
oppression of the contemporary rulers. Guru Nanak, the first Sikh Guru, stressed the oneness of God,
Immanent, Creator, “Who is Timeless, Eternal Reality, Formless, Unborn, Unincarnated and Self-existent
without Fear and Rancour, and Who is realised by the Enlightener’s Grace.” These attributes are
incorporated in the Mu/ Mantra of Guru Nanak’s Japji, which is the “fundamental primal text expounding the
beliefs of Sikhism.” He explicitly denounced all those religious traditions which denied the unity of God. He
declared that “the belief in gods and goddesses was the source of maya (great illusion),”! which led people
astray. The Gurus accept E& Ongar as a declaration of the unity of God. In Asa Raag, the Guru says : “Six
are the (Hindu) Shashiras and six their authors who have laid down six different philosophical concepts. But
the Guru of these groups is God Himself.”
Guru Nanak led a crusade against the caste system, idolatry, ritualism, asceticism and the Brahmin’s
claim to superiority. He put an end to the role of middle-men (Brahmins) in man’s relation with God. He
advocated that man can be one with Him through his own good deeds. He emphasised moral virtues and
considered rituals to be a hindrance in the salvation of man. He denounced idol worship of gods in most
explicit terms : “The ignorant fools take stones and worship them, O Hindus, how shall the stone which itself
sinketh carry you across ?”3 He rejected asceticism and emphasised truthful living based on good deeds and
righteousness. He impressed upon his followers that salvation could be attained through fulfilment of one’s
duties towards family and society. For Guru Nanak, social responsibility forms an integral part of the
spiritual attributes of the ideal man. It is this element that constitutes one of the essential tenets of the Sikh
faith. It is this element that gives Sikhism its distinctive and historic character, role and personality.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Guru Nanak laid emphasis on the brotherhood of man and strongly condemned social inequality.
He declared : “The sense of high and low, and of caste and colour, such are the illusions created in man.’’
He raised his voice against economic exploitation and political despotism of his times. “This Ka/ age is a
knife and kings are butchers; justice has taken to wings. The moon of Truth is invisible in the black night of
falsehood.”> “Rulers are turned beasts of prey, their offices hounds; None do they allow in peace to rest. The
subordinates wound the people with their claws.”® According to Guru Nanak, the world is not only real, but
it is also a meaningful place where alone God’s Creative and Attributive Will works. That is, “God being
riches to the poor, milk to the child, and eyes to the blind,””’ the seeker has to follow the ethical path of values
and virtues laid down by the Guru. It is clear that in Guru Nanak’s mission of love, two objectives become
logically uppermost; and these he emphasised unambiguously in his bani, namely, that he was to establish
equality and fraternity among men, and that it was the duty and responsibility of the religious man and the
religious society he was creating, to resist oppression and safeguard human rights and values. The life-
affirming faith founded by Guru Nanak attracted a large number of followers who found in it a welcome
escape from the debasing caste discrimination, Brahminical domination and empty ritualism. It is a
revolutionary system in which the dichotomy between the spiritual life and the empirical life of man was
emphatically broken for the first time in the East. It was Guru Nanak who laid and led the path of universal
love and emancipation of man without distinction of caste and creed. The call for this mission was given by
him in these terms :
‘Tf thou art zealous of playing the game of Love,
Then come upon my path with thy head on thy palm.
Yea, once thou settest thy foot on this way,
Then find not a way out, and be prepared to lay down thy head.’®
It is in this context that the importance of Guru Nanak’s criticism of the doctrine of abimsa should be
understood. “Men discriminate not and quarrel over meat eating, they do not know what is flesh and what is
non-flesh, or what is sin and what is not sin.””? “Life”, he said, “is in every grain of corn or seed.””!0
LEVEL OF ACHIEVEMENT
It is in this background that we have to charter the course of Sikh history from Guru Nanak to Guru
Gobind Singh. After Guru Nanak, the period of the next three Gurus relates mainly to the creation,
expansion, and organisation of the cohesive society or Panth, which Gutu Nanak had started. With each
succeeding Guru, Sikhism became increasingly crystallised and institutionalised into a distinct faith and
society.
The next major landmark was the time of the Fifth Guru, who not only compiled the scripture of the
new society, thereby weaning it away from all earlier beliefs, risked confrontation with the empire, and made
the supreme sacrifice of his life, but also created in his lifetime what Dr H.R. Gupta calls “a state within a
state.” No wonder Emperor Jahangir took note of this mounting challenge, and attacked the Sikh society.!!
From this time onward, the Sikhs had to make tremendous sacrifices and undergo sufferings to preserve their
faith.
Purther, it is important that the doctrine of mii and piri proclaimed by Guru Hargobind, is the
natural and inevitable corollary of the path of love and true service of man, of the rejection of asceticism and
monasticism, the acceptance of a householder’s life and responsibility, and of securing justice, equality and
freedom for all men preached by Guru Nanak. The Guru justified use of force to uphold justice and
righteousness, and to defend the oppressed. Guru Tegh Bahadur, carried on the Sikh tradition of martyrdom
for the cause of justice and emancipation of man.
Guru Gobind Singh laid down an initiation (ari) ceremony for the Sikhs, admitting them into the
Khalsa Order and prescribed the wearing of five K’s. Those who went through this ceremony, became
members of the Khalsa brotherhood. The organisation was committed to pursuing the right path and
resisting and undoing injustice, tyranny and aggression, since in the Sikh society it was a religious duty and
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
social responsibility to promote and maintain righteousness. The Guru also furnished the Order of the
Khalsa with the institutions of Panj Piaras (Five beloved ones or leaders) and daswandh (voluntary contribution
of one tenth of one’s income to the exchequer of the Panth), thereby bestowing upon the organisation the
character of a self-contained community. It is significant to note that of the five beloved ones initiated by the
tenth Guru, four belonged to what the Indian society then regarded as the Shudra caste. The Guru’s object
was to obliterate all distinctions of caste and creed, and to weld his followers into a cohesive society. The
Sikhs and the five beloved ones were amazed when the Guru requested them to initiate him into the Khalsa
brotherhood in exactly the same manner as he had initiated them. By this symbolic act, the Guru invested the
Khalsa with leadership of the Panth and the authority of his personality. Henceforward the Guru was the
Khalsa and the Khalsa was the Guru. Sikhism, thus, emerged as the most democratic religion in the world.
The Gutus categorically rejected all such beliefs, rituals or ceremonies as implied the recognition of
anything but one true Lord. In order to emphasise the complete independence and separateness of Sikh
ideology, Guru Gobind Singh introduced the Nash doctrine, involving Kirtnash, Kulnash, Dharamnash,
Bharamnash, and Karamnash i.e. giving up of all those beliefs, prejudices and traditions that stood in the way of
the sole worship of the Supreme Being.!? In this way they made a complete break of the Sikh society with the
past religious systems, traditions and customs. The Guru accomplished this many-sided transformation in
bold defiance of the age-old beliefs, dogmas and conservatism of the traditional Indian religions. The Khalsa
created by Guru Gobind Singh was unique, both in its internal features and external form and was to play a
vital role in Indian history. In the words of J. D. Cunnigham, “A living spirit possesses the whole Sikh people
and the impress of Gobind has not only elevated and altered the constitution of their minds, but has operated
materially and given amplitude to their physical frames.’’
Let us here record the relevant and clear injunctions of Guru Gobind Singh, “He who keeps alight
the torch of Truth and with love, has faith only in One Supreme Being, and does not believe, even by
mistake, in fasting, monastic life, or worship of graves or ancestors, is the true Khalsa.”!4 Further, a few
extracts from the report of a Muslim chronicler, Ahmad Shah Batala, as given in his book Twarikh-i-Hind, of
the speech by Guru Gobind Singh given at the time of the amrit (initiating) ceremony are as follows: “I wish
you all to embrace one creed and follow one path, obliterating all differences of religion. Let the four Hindu
castes, who have different rules laid down for them in the Shastras, abandon them altogether, and mix freely
with one another. Let no one deem himself superior to another. Do not follow the old scriptures. Let none
pay heed to the Ganges and other places of pilgrimage, which are considered holy in the Hindu religion, or
adore Hindu deities, like Rama, Krishna, Brahma and Durga, but all should have faith only in Guru Nanak
and his successors. Let men of four castes receive my amrit, eat out of the same vessel and feel no disgust or
contempt for one another.’”!5
The spirit of Guru Gobind Singh was carried on by Banda Singh Bahadur and his men, who fought
against the Mughals under most adverse circumstances. But they stuck to their faith and principles until the
end of their lives. The Sikh devotion to their religion and their spirit is evident from the fact that out of 740
Sikh prisoners of war, who were executed in Delhi, along with Banda, not one deserted the faith, even while
given the choice to do so.!¢
SIKHISM IN THE 19TH CENTURY
Here it is necessary to give a demographic picture of the Sikh community from the 18th to the 19th
century. The struggle and the persecution of the Sikhs were severest during the mid 18th century. A price
was put on every Sikh head, and three times it was reported to the authorities that the Sikhs had been
exterminated root and branch.'? During this period of struggle, it is reported that at one time barely two
thousand guerillas were left.!* This was the spirit and character of the Sikhs, when they gained power in the
later half of the 18th century. The establishment of the Khalsa commonwealth, naturally, gave opportunity
both to Muslim and Hindu populations to seek conversion for reasons which were obviously mundane. The
Sikhs never started any proselytising campaign, because it is not sanctified in their religion. Obviously, these
new entrants were slow in shedding some of their old personal, family or customary prejudices and beliefs,
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
which included faith in local gods and goddesses, saints, fakirs and pirs. In the time of Ranjit Singh the
number of Sikhs, thus, rose to 10-11 &bs.!° The first census in 1881 reports that the number of Sikhs was 17
lakhs. It is evident that this large scale increase in the number of Sikhs was certainly not due to the natural
increase in the members of the faith, who had struggled to power in the 18th century. Regarding the Sikhs in
the second half of the 19th century, Ibbetson reports that with the exception of the Akalis, who still adhered
to the ordinances of the Khalsa, many of the original observances of the Sikhs had fallen in disuse but for the
five external signs and abstinence from tobacco.?! Similarly, the sehjdhari group of the Nirankaris, who were
sixty thousand at the time of the census of 1891, never believed in any god or goddess and adhered strictly to
faith in Guru Granth Sahib as the sole scripture and guide.”
A demoralising effect of the annexation of the Punjab was that some of the Sikh gyanis, who were
very learned in their special departments, did not find jobs for their talents. They, therefore, went over to the
Hindus and taught their religious books. Apart from neglecting the dissemination of Sikh thought, they, in
otder to please their employers, started giving a Hindu tint to the Sikh doctrines and beliefs, causing thereby
great harm to Sikhism. Secondly, it is also true that many of the Hindu entrants to the Sikh faith who had
naturally curbed or shed Hindu rituals and customs during the Sikh rule, reverted to their old prejudices and
practices.
Before the advent of the Singh Sabha Movement in 1873, the Sikh society was, thus, passing through
a lean phase. With their uncertain political future, Sikhs had become a prey to Brahminical Hinduism, and
the socio-religious fabric of the community was being damaged. Owing to the weakness of some of the neo-
Sikhs, the number of Sikhs embracing other faiths was increasing steadily.23 A contemporary observer noted,
“Just as we do not see any Buddhist in the country except in images, in the same fashion, the Sikhs, who are
now here and there, visible in their turbans and their other religious forms like wrist-bangles and swords, will
be seen only in pictures and museums. Their own sons and grandsons clad in coats and trousers and sporting
mushroom-like caps will go to see them in museums and say in their pidgin Punjabi, ‘Look, that is the picture
of a Sikh — the tribe that inhabited this country once upon a time.”4
The proselytising activities of the Christian missionaries also alarmed the Sikhs. The historic
conversion of Maharaja Dalip Singh (son of Maharaja Ranjit Singh) and Raja Harnam Singh of Kapurthala to
Christianity came as a rude shock to the Sikhs.?5 The British sponsored Christian Missions had started schools
at Batala, Amritsar and Taran Tarn. When in 1873 some Sikh students of the Mission school at Amritsar
were preparing to crop their heads and openly accept Christianity under pressure from the missionaries, the
Sikhs of Amritsar had a rude awakening. They moved quickly to check this apostasy. In 1874 some
important leaders got together to form the Amritsar Singh Sabha. They had taken a laudable step but they
had in the forefront of this movement a few self-centred men such as Baba Khem Singh Bedi and the Raja of
Faridkot. The former expected to be paid homage for his Bedi lindage and always demanded seat on a special
dais in Sikh congregations. He also accepted offerings from followers, like pwjaris. At about this time the
Sikhs were being duped into an offer of assistance in their anti-Christian campaign by an artful Arya Samajist
preacher — Swami Dayanand. His thesis was the abolition of idol worship, as he explained that God can be
seen in all His Creation. He believed in the primacy of the Vedas but carefully concealed this view in his
initial lectures in Punjab. He found an excellent ally in Giani Ditt Singh, who was just finding his feet under
the able guidance of the Principal of the Oriental College, Lahore — Prof. Gurmukh Singh. Both these
gentlemen had very humble beginnings — the former being a Ramdasia from Patiala, and the latter being the
son of a cook of the Raja of Kapurthala.
Giani Ditt Singh had a sharp intellect, and after taking amrit and going through the full ‘“Giani’ course
in Divinity at the Oriental College, gained so much knowledge and mastery on the art of public speaking that
he was able to hold his own against the best exponents of religious thought of those times. Swami Dayanand
appreciated his talents and joined hands with him in the initial stage of their challenge to Christian preaching.
But when the Swamy began extolling the Vedas and criticising Guru Nanak, calling him an uneducated man,
ignorant of Sanskrit, etc., the Giani parted company. The Swamy published all his derogatory comments on
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
the Gurus and their teachings in a treatise called The Satyarath Parkash. He was challenged to a public debate
by Giani Ditt Singh and the latter was able to justify all the tenet of Sikhism and to prove the Swami wrong in
all his surmises of the Creation.
As there was hardly any preaching of Sikhism amongst the masses either in the villages or in the
towns, most of the new converts accepted the view of the Swami that Sikhs were only a part of the Sanatan
Hindu fold. We must remember that the main gurdwaras at Nanakana Sahib, Taran Tarn, Lahore and
Amritsar were in the hands of mahants and pujaris, who had no knowledge of Gurbani. They were in fact
Hindus at heart, and had been given custody of gurdwaras under the policy of the British to keep the Sikhs
away from their main source of inspiration and spiritual strength.
So a large number of Sikhs, especially the recent converts of convenience, shed their Sikh symbols,
and reverted to Hinduism. And the Amritsar Singh Sabha, led by Baba Khem Singh and other landed gentry,
did nothing to preach true Sikh principles but rather encouraged the cult of personal worship and collection
of offerings. This practice, though in consonance with the old Hindu culture, was violative of Sikh doctrines,
wherein the Gurus “had prohibited touching the feet of so-called pious men, and had stated that the religous
path lay in working hard and sharing one’s earnings with others.”’6 But, these wealthy Sikhs had got a vested
interest in these cults, because personal worship brought them offerings from both their Sikh and non-Sikh
followers.?” Out of sheer self-interest of maintaining their income and offerings from their Hindu followers,
they started saying that the Gurus had preached the same religious system as in the Vedas, even though the
Gurus had called ‘the Vedic doctrines to be misleading concerning caste, heaven, hell, etc..28 So to blunt the
onslaughts of the Christian Missions and of the Arya Samajs and to counter the wrong interpretation of the
Sikh tenets by the leaders of the Amritsar Singh Sabha, Prof. Gurmukh Singh and Giani Ditt Singh founded
in 1879 the Lahore Singh Sabha, which immediately set about the preaching of equality of man regardless of
face, caste or economic status. They stressed the need for Sikh Rahit and faith only in the Akal Purakh,
rejecting devis, devatas or any places of pilgrimage, etc. In other words, it was a revival of the teachings of the
Gurus as contained in Guru Granth Sahib and in the Rahitnamas of Guru Gobind Singh. The first
newspaper in Punjabi was out in 1880 under the editorship of these two stalwarts. When their message
reached every village of Punjab, a new life was breathed into the followers of the Sikh way of life. Branches
of the Lahore Singh Sabha sprang up in scores all over Punjab, and the earlier Amritsar Sabha lost its following.
Recently some scholars in the West have presented a distorted version of the nineteenth century
Sikhism. For example, H.S. Oberoi, in his paper entitled Re-reading Sikh Experience in the Nineteenth Century,
read recently at a seminar at Berkeley (U.S.A.), observes, “The word Sanatan derives from Sanskrit, and has
connotation of something that is ancient, almost as if out of secular time. The Sanatanist Sikhs, therefore,
believed that these customs, rites and rituals had origins in the beginnings of time, when the universe came
into existence and were beyond the pale of diachronic time.’ ...... ‘The fact that the Sikhs took part in the
myths, worship and cults of miracle saints, goddesses and village gods, does not imply that Sikhism was in a
state of decline or irrational. These practices were an integral part of a coherent way of life, and should not
be judged from standards which were invented at the turn of the century.”
Let us now examine the position stated by Oberoi in his paper. He mentions four practices which he
claims to be ancient and native to Sikhs of the times. These are the worship of Sakhi Sarvar, Guga Pir, Seetla
Devi and village ancestors. A close examination of Oberoi’s paper reveals that he has merely tried to conceal
the reality by resort to vague generalisations, and by giving unnecessary details of the concerned practices,
without specifying the extent of their prevalence in the Sikh society.
We first take up the case of the worship of Sakhi Sarvar which is the only practice of which he has
indicated some data in support of his argument by saying that less than 3% Sikhs had faith in Sakhi Sarvar.
Otherwise, about twenty pages of his paper are filled with irrelevant verbiage giving just a journalistic
description of the four practices. The entire structure of Oberoi’s argument is based on the flimsy premises
that these practices were native and ancient, and that no one ever prohibited them. He writes, “It was Sikh
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
reformers in the 19th century who for the first time labelled many of the current beliefs and practices among
the Sikhs as acts of deviance and expressions of a superstitious mind.” This observation of Oberoi is a clear
misstatement. Guru Granth Sahib is full of hymns rejecting the spiritual character of devis, jogis, pirs, etc.
“Afflicted are Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva; afflicted is the entire world.””° “The Vedas do not know His
greatness. Neither Brahma, nor Shiva have any clue of Him. The devis and devatas have sought to know Him,
but failed.’”°
In the Sikh tradition there are four stories concerning the futility of Sakhi Sarvar worship. The first
story is of a Sakhi Sarvaria, Bhai Manj, coming to Guru Arjun for religious guidance. The Guru’s reply is very
revealing of the Sikh thesis. He said, “You may go on with the easy path of Sakhi Sarvar worship, because
Sikhism is a very difficult path, and unless you are willing to be dispossessed of your wealth and to sacrifice
your very life, it is no use coming to me.” But, Bhai Manj did become a Sikh.?! The second story also
concerns Guru Arjun when he deprecated the Sakhi Sarvar practice of preparing a big cake and presenting it
before the priest who read Durud (a verse from Quran), and then kept the cake, giving only a marginal part to
the devotees. The Guru says, “Without the true Guru they must sit and watch without eating until the Durud
is read.”>? The Guru, thus, denounced the practice of seeking benediction of the priest, for, only a true Guru
could lead one to the right path. The third story is of a Sikh’s daughter having been married to the son of a
Sakhi Sarvaria. The bride seeks the blessings of Guru Hargobind, and her husband also becomes a Sikh. A
tussle develops between the groom and his father, when the former demolishes the family shrine of Sakhi
Sarvar. But the groom continues to be a Sikh. Later, his handsome son founds a village now called Bhai
Rupa in Nabha State. A similar story concerning the futility of Sakhi Sarvar worship relates to the time of
Guru Tegh Bahadur, when he visited Patiala area.*4 In fact, Sikh writings and Rahitnamas categorically
prohibit the worship of dev, devtas, saints etc. Even Bhangu in his Panth Parkash (mid 19th century)
specifically condemns the worship of Sakhi Sarvar. He says that the Sikhs did not believe in ghosts, spirits
and graves, nor did they have any faith in Guga and Sakhi Sarvar. He rather refers to the “frequent clashes
between the Sikhs and the Sarvarias in the villages and towns of Punjab.”°° Therefore, in the face of a clear
rejection of the Sakhi Sarvar practice by the Guru, the Sikh religious literature, and the traditions, the
existence of a marginal 3% residue of the Sakhi Sarvarias among the new Hindu entrants to Sikhism, only
shows how insignificant is its value in drawing a correct picture of the Sikh society in that period. In fact, it is
creditable that under the Sikh influence all except about 3% of the new entrants had given up their old
Hindus practices.
In this context, Rose clearly endorses Bhangu’s view, “comparatively few Sikhs are followers of
Sarvar, and there is in fact a sort of opposition in the central districts between Sikhs and Sultanis. You hear
men say that one party in a village worships the Guru, the other worships Sarvar; that is that one party are
Sikhs, the other ordinary Hindus who follow Sarvar. It has been suggested that the worship of Sarvar
probably spread eastward among the Jats in the 15th and 16th centuries, and was the prevalent cult at the
time of the great development of Sikhism in the days of Guru Gobind Singh; and that most of the
conversions to the Khalsa faith were from the worshippers of Sultan. This appears a very probable account
of the origin of such opposition as does exist between these two forms of faith. As between the Hindus
generally and the Sultanis there is no sort of opposition; there are instances in the popular legends of men
opposing the cult of Sarvar, but in the present day the Sultanis are looked on as ordinary Hindus.”3’ Oberoi,
while he gives irrelevant details of the miraculous powers attributed to Sakhi Sarvar and lavishly quotes Rose
as evidence, seems to have deliberately concealed the above mentioned conclusion drawn by Rose and,
instead, made the distortion that Singh Sabha leaders were the first to object to such practices. Such clear
misstatements are generally made by partisan propagandists, but never, we believe, by any academician. This
indicates either a lack of indepth study or a conscious attempt to suppress facts with a view to
misrepresenting Sikhism.
There is another misstatement when Oberoi says, “Historians cannot simply reproduce these value
judgements and employ categories invented by a section of the Sikh elite.’ We have seen that prohibition of
these practices was neither the invention of the Singh Sabha, nor was it the first to object to them. Nor is it
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
true that leaders of the Singh Sabha formed a section of the Sikh elite. In fact, the pioneers of the Singh
Sabha, namely, Bhais Ditt Singh and Gurmukh Singh were persons of extremely humble beginnings. Ditt
Singh belonged to a poor Ramdasia family of a small village (Nandpur Kalaur) of district Ropar.3® Gurmukh
Singh’s father was just a cook in Kapurthala.*? As against that, the persons with vested interests in personal
worship were Baba Sit Khem Singh Bedi, Baba Sir Gurbakhsh Singh Bedi and the Raja of Faridkot. Men like
Vehiria were the proteges of wealthy persons, whom they had kept to propagate their point of view, even
though clearly opposed to the Sikh doctrines in Guru Granth Sahib, and who constituted the elite, and who
represented the voice of the people and the Sikh culture, is evident from the fact that in the tussle between
them, all the local and base Singh Sabhas in the country shifted their loyalty to the Ditt Singh group, except
three which belonged to the towns or places of these feudal kings.“ It is, therefore, just naive to suggest that
these persons of small beginnings could achieve the tremendous success they did achieve by just innovations
or inventions, unless what they promoted or preached had the clear sanction of the scripture and the Sikh
tradition. As pointed out earlier, the Singh Sabha of 1899 had quite a hard time in countering the inroads into
Sikhism from both the Christian missions and the Arya Samaj. The onslaught still continues. One of the ex-
missionaries has recently tried to create doubt and disbelief on every aspect of the Sikh tradition and history.
His efforts include sponsoring bogus research by his own students, and promoting the appointments of non-
Sikhs to certain Chairs of Sikh Studies in Canada. One of those incumbents is Dr Harjot Oberoi, who also
suggests that the real background of Sikhs is Sanatani Hinduism and that present Sikhism is a later
development that came up only in the later half of the 19th Century, under the influence of the Singh Sabha
Movement. His stress on Sanatani origin of Sikhism and of peasant practices of the cults of Sakhi Sarvar and
idol worship smacks so strongly of the Arya Samaj preachings of Swami Dayanand, that one begins to
wonder if he is not from the same school himself. W.H. MeLeod did well in picking such an enemy of
Sikhism for the Chair of Sikh Studies at the University of British Columbia. It serves his grand design of
undermining the Sikh religion by posing as one of its great promoters, and looking around for any schismatic
literature such as the obscure manuscript 1245 to promote doubt and confusion among Sikhs.
Regarding Guga, Sitla and ancestor worship, Oberoi has given no data at all in support of his
argument, meaning thereby that the extent of these practices was even less significant than the practice of
Sakhi Sarvar worship. Oberoi instead of being precise has written page after page of a journalistic account of
the practices without suggesting the extent of these practices, their sanction by the Sikh tradition, or their
existence during any earlier period of Sikh history. Every student of Hindu religion knows that in that
system, especially under Parva Mimansa, spiritual and other benefits can be obtained by the practice of Yajnas,
sacrifices, mantras, etc. On the other hand, even the most elementry student of Guru Granth Sahib is aware
that all such practices and worship of dev, devatas and the like are regarded as futile in Sikhism. Let us here
just indicate two instances. Every scholar of Sikhism and Sikh history knows that the basic reason why the
Hindu Hill Rajas refused to cooperate with the tenth Guru was his rejection of deo? worship and their rituals
and caste observances.*! The second instance is of a complaint made to Guru Hargobind about a Sikh having
broken an idol of a dev7.42 The Sikh explained as to what was the worth of a dev idol if it could not protect
itself. It indicates that no one respected the dev or devatas in the Sikh society.
Without indicating any statistical evidence, Oberoi makes another assertion saying that “the
popularity of Sakhi Sarvar among the Sikhs was matched by another pir called Guga Pir.” It is necessary to
understand that in the old Punjab, Sikhs were less than 14% and the Hindus were more than double the
number of Sikhs; and even among the Sikhs about three fourths were 19th century Hindu converts of
convenience. It is, therefore, highly misleading to talk in vague terms about some Hindu practices current
among Punjab Hindus and then to relate them to the Sikhs on the mere ground that the Singh Sabha had also
preached against them as being contrary to the Sikh tradition.
Regarding Sitla worship too, Oberoi is equally irrelevant and vague. The Sikh position about devi
worship both in precept and practice, has already been indicated. In the article of the Khalsa Akhbar of March
6, 1896, it is the entire Punjab population that has been addressed to give up Sitla worship, without even
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
mentioning the word Sikh therein. And the advice to the people is to have themselves inoculated instead of
suffering the disease.
About ancestor worship among Sikhs, Oberoi’s observations ate even more far-fetched. He cites
Dube’s Indian Village and Brubaker’s A Study of South Indian Village Goddesses and their Religious Meaning. The
only reference to the Sikhs is a manual by an army officer mentioning that Satnamis, Hindus and Sikhs had a
practice of ancestor worship.
From Oberoi’s own paper, it is evident that Sitla, Guga and ancestor worship among the Sikhs were
even less significant than the worship of Sakhi Sarvar prevalent among less than 3% Sikhs. It is suggested by
Oberoi that though the practice of Sakhi Sarvar worship was insignificant in 1911, it must have been wide-
spread and native to the Sikh society before the Singh Sabha propaganda. The argument is quite meaningless.
If in the earlier four hundred years of preaching by the ten Gurus themselves and others, the Sikh tradition
could not eliminate these Hindu practices entirely, how could the Singh Sabha workers, with humble
beginnings, work this miracle in about one generation ? It is quite significant that in order to prove his point
that in the 19th century there was not much of an ideological difference between the Hindus and the Sikhs,
Oberoi has quoted neither Guru Granth Sahib nor any Rabitnamas, nor any earlier Sikh literature or traditions,
but only AS. Vahiria and Gulab Singh, both spokesmen of the Bedi group with vested interests in
maintaining the cult of personal worship. So far as the loyalist Gulab Singh is concerned, his propagandist
statement that the four Vedas are also the religious books of the Sikhs is quite understandable. But for
Oberoi to quote him approvingly shows either poor scholarship and a gross ignorance of the contents of
Guru Granth Sahib, the Nash doctrine of Guru Gobind Singh, the Rahitnamas and the Sikh religious literature
and practices, or a deliberate attempt at distortion by his avoiding all references to Guru Granth Sahib and
Sikh literature. Even in the article of the Khalsa Akhbar, dated March 29, 1901, it had clearly been argued by
the Sikh paper, by quoting Guru Granth Sahib, that the Gurus had specifically repudiated the doctrine of the
Vedas. Oberoi has also failed to record the categoric contemporary evidence that the Akalis, the core of the
Panth, were fully adhering to the norm prescribed by the Gurus. If his conclusions were correct, and Sikhs,
like the Hindu peasantry, were mere superstitious worshippers of dev7, devatas and Guga and Sakhi Sarvar Pirs,
how does Oberoi explain that (i) the Sikhs, an insignificant section of the population, were able to supplant
the Mughal Empire in the entire north-west and stem once for all the wave after wave of invaders that had
plagued India for a thousand years, (ii) a leaderless community gave to the British the toughest fight, almost
to the point of their defeat and annihilation, on the Indian soil, (iit) the Sikhs were predominantly the people
who organised and manned the first rebellion (Ghaddar rebellion) against the British, (iv) of the 121 persons
executed and 2646 sentenced to life imprisonment during the entire freedom struggle during the 20th century,
93 and 2047, respectively, were Sikhs*? and (v) during the period of Emergency from June, 1975 - March,
1977, involving the suspension of the Indian Constitution and abrogation of all human rights and individual
liberties, it was only the Sikhs who conducted a regular civil disobedience movement (Save Democracy
Morcha) suffering imprisonment of over forty thousand persons, while in the rest of India, not even half
that number courted arrest or imprisonment.*
CHANGES MADE BY SINGH SABHA
Now, considering the fourth aspect of the Singh Sabha Movement, namely, the revival it brought
about in the Sikh society, we find that every step they took and change they made, had full sanction of the
Sikh scripture and tradition. One has only to read Ham Hindu Nahin by Bhai Kahn Singh, and Naki Sikh
Prabodh by Ditt Singh, to find that almost every page quotes the bani of the Gurus in support of their
suggestions.*6 The only new step they took, was the establishment of educational institutions on modern lines
and the publication and propagation of religious literature, not available earlier, because the services of the
Printing Press had not been fully established yet.
Oberoi denies that Sikh resurgence in the 19th century derived its inspiration from the teachings of
the Gurus and the Sikh scripture. The greatest contribution of Singh Sabha lies in projecting Sikh religion in
its traditional perspective. Sikhism is a revealed religion and has a recorded scripture authenticated by the
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Guru himself. Oberoi looks upon Sikhism as a rural religion, which “by definition is a part of the oral culture
of people, and it is always difficult to reconstruct and recover all the elements which go into its making.”
Such statements prove the dishonesty of the writer in so far as there is a clear blackout of the writings of the
Gurus, of Sikh tradition and practices, and of Sikh history in the earlier three centuries. In his entire paper,
Oberoi has not quoted even one line from Guru Granth Sahib, indicating the principles of the Sikh faith; nor
has he mentioned any of its fundamentals on which the Gurus insisted. The only conclusion one can draw is
that Oberoi has not read and fully grasped a single page of our sacred scripture Guru Granth Sahib. To talk
of the characteristics of the Sikh faith and beliefs without reference to the Gurus, Guru Granth Sahib, and the
Sikh tradition and history, is something completely incomprehensible, if not deliberately biased. One
wonders how Oberoi found a free and easy access to the so-called ‘Oral tradition’ to the exclusion of the
actual Sikh history.
The burden of Oberoi’s thesis is to highlight the points of deviation and departure from the Sikh
tradition. In analysing the nature of Sikhism he forgets the historical perspective and the Sikh ideology.
Marked by descriptive profusion and meaningless rhetoric, his thesis betrays an obvious ignorance of the
basic tenets of the Sikh faith. By characterising the aberrations in the 19th century Sikh society as the original
ot ancient Sikhism, he has identified Sikh norms with the Hindu practices of the neo-converts. He has made
a particular blackout of the Sikh history and the Sikh literature and injunctions that specifically prohibited pre-
Sikh Hindu beliefs and practices. The author has taken it upon himself to select or reject any opinion; thus
completely ignoring the traditional model and negating the original sources and opinions of many earlier or
contemporary scholars. His contention that ‘Sanatan Sikhism’, (a term used by Swami Dayanand) constituted
real Sikh tradition, is self-contradictory and deceptive. This term has had no place or relevance in the entire
history of Sikhism or any earlier writings pertaining to Sikhs. A Sikh movement, Singh Sabha or any other,
should be judged in terms of what the Gurus had taught and the Sikhs had practised in the Guru or the
revolutionary period. Any attempt virtually to legitimize the Hindu practices or the aberrations against which
the Sikh Gurus, the Rahitnamas and Sikh writings had launched a crusade, is nothing but misleading. Apart
from the clear injunctions of Guru Gobind Singh quoted earlier, a near-contemporary source also records
that “Guru Gobind Singh rejected the paths of both the Hindus and the Muslims, and created his own
Panth.’*” The Rabitnamas emphasised that “the Sikhs should maintain their separate identity from the caste
society.”48 Rattan Singh Bhangu, in his Prachin Panth Prakash, talks of “separate identity of the Panth, its
egalitarian character, and the plebeian political objectives and character of the Khalsa.’’4° The testimony of
earlier injunctions, writings and contemporary observers cannot be ignored. Therefore, to designate the lean
period of Sikhism, when Hindu practices had crept into it, as Sanatan Sikhism is a misnomer. To assess and
measure the significance of an aberration in the period of decline of the Sikh movement, without reference to
the norm, the long standing tradition or the injunctions in the scripture or Sikh writings, suggests a lack of
sense of proportion or an attempt at distortion.
The Singh Sabha leaders aimed at “restoring the pristine purity of Sikhism,’ without propounding
any philosophy of their own or introducing a new practice unsanctioned by the ideology or the tradition. Any
Sikh, who adhered to the injunctions of the ten Gurus, and was ready to serve the community, could be
admitted to the fold of the Singh Sabha.*! There was no ceremony to be gone through for this purpose, nor
was there any distinctive dress, badge or mark to be worn. The movement was not a new cult. It retained its
democratic character, despite the efforts of some persons to style themselves as Gurus and to wield control
over its affairs. Baba Khem Singh Bedi introduced a new cult, and tried to gain supremacy over the activities
of the Sabha. Being a direct descendant of Guru Nanak, he virtually aspired to become a Guru.** He wanted
a well-furnished seat (gade//a) for himself, even in the presence of Guru Granth Sahib.°? Baba Khem Singh
Bedi wished his authority to be regarded as paramount and absolute in religious matters and himself to be
looked upon as Guru in succession to Guru Nanak.*4 Bhai Avtar Singh Vahiria was a chosen associate of
Baba Khem Singh Bedi. In his books, Khalsa Dharam Shastar, Sikh Dharam Tat Darshan and Gurdarshan Shastar,
he writes that the Sikh Gurus did not prohibit the worship of gods and goddesses, and that it was wrong to
remove caste distinctions.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Actually, it was such obvious misstatements that Prof. Gurmukh Singh, Giani Ditt Singh, Bhai
Mayya Singh and Bhai Jawahar Singh of the Lahore Singh Sabha were out to controvert. They aimed at
checking “outside influences and undesirable elements which had crept into Sikhism, and thus to restore it to
its former purity.”>> Whereas the appeal of the Khem Singh Bedi and the Vahiria group, who had their own
vested interests, was mostly confined to their personal circles, that of the Lahore Sabha went further and
touched the hearts of the general mass of the community.5° Missionaries (Parcharaks) were sent even in the
interior of the province to spread the message of Sikhism among hundreds and thousands of the village folks,
who constituted the backbone of the Sikh community, and without whose co-operation no movement could
acquire a mass base. They made them aware of the fundamentals of Sikh religion, thereby removing all
doubts regarding the identity and practices of the Khalsa. In the words of Giani Ditt Singh, “Having sprung
from the Hindus, the Sikhs are yet a separate community clearly distinguished from them in outward form,
religious and social outlook, conception of God and Gurus, mode of worship, language of the scriptures and
their ideas regarding caste, pilgrimage and priesthood.’’” In fact, the pamphlets and writings of the Singh
Sabhaites profusely quote the scripture and religious writings in support of their views, exhorting Sikhs to
shed the wrong practices that had crept in the Sikh fold following the political confusion after the defeat of
the Khalsa. Bhai Kahan Singh’s book, Ham Hindu Nabin (We Ate Not Hindus) was a conscious reaction
against the propaganda by some of the Hindus and Sikhs like the Khem Singh and Vahiria group. Giani Gain
Singh’s Panth Parkash, Naurang Singh’s Sikh Hindu Nahin, Jodh Singh’s Sacha Dharmi and many others also
quoted several passages from the Sikh scripture to prove that the Sikh religion was an independent religion,
and had nothing to do with Hinduism. In fact, Sikhism had controverted almost every fundamental of
Hinduism.
Such writings inspired the Sikhs with self-confidence and gave them a renewed sense of
distinctiveness and direction.5* The masses became sufficiently enlightened not to be misled by the Sikh
vested interests and the Arya Samajists, who tried to say that Sikhs were a part of Hindus. The Singh Sabha
leaders had a clear and firm grasp of the issues facing the Sikhs. They rightly realised that the form and spirit
of the Khalsa could be kept intact only if the Sikhs conformed to the code of conduct prescribed by Guru
Gobind Singh. Any laxity in maintaining the five symbols (the five K’s), they knew, would mean a fall from
the faith and would lead to gradual erosion of the basic Sikh ideals.*? Bhai Kahn Singh in his books, Garmat
Prabhakar and Gurmat Sudhakar, quoted several passages from the Sikh scripture in order to prove that the
worship of images was contrary to the teachings of the Gurus.
The Singh Sabha leaders laid emphasis on the inculcation of such virtues as love of God, service of
one’s fellow beings, purity of living, charitableness and truthfulness. They made it clear, as the Gurus had
emphasised in their bani, that the way to one’s moral and spiritual uplift lay through good deeds and not
through miracles, mystries and mantras. “The worship of the Almighty in homes is the best of all to obtain
eternal happiness, rather than going to pilgrimage, where one was bound to be misled by selfish and greedy
priests.’60 Misguided notions regarding the worship of graves, tombs, sawadbs and cremation marks, which
were contrary to Sikh religious injunctions and tradition, were clearly condemned in the preachings of the
Singh Sabha.*! Giani Ditt Singh’s booklet Durga Parbodb, was written primarily to dispel the belief in pirs and
jakirs which was of no avail and diverted man’s attention from the path of righteousness. That is why, as
indicated already, all the thirty seven Singh Sabhas, except the three Sabhas of Rawalpindi, Faridkot and
Amritsar, which were personally connected with Khem Singh and Raja of Faridkot group, followed the lead
of the Ditt Singh-Gurmukh Singh group.”
As a result, the period of diffidence was over, and Sikhism regained its self-confidence in its historic
mission. The Census Report of 1921 noted: “Sikhism is a religion with a very distinct worship of its own
and having attained a position of independence, is fully entitled to rank as a separate religion.”
The passing of the Anand Marriage Act in 1909, legalising the Sikh form of marriage, was a
significant achievement of the Singh Sabha. Various Sikh organisations and Singh Sabhas sent telegrams and
petitions signed by Wkhs of Sikhs, demanding the passing of the Act.°+ The Government was impressed by
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
this demonstration of Sikh unity in favour of this legislation which involved a separate Sikh entity. It was an
important step forward because the State was forced to accept the self assertion of the will of an independent
socio-religious community.
The Sabha periodicals, the Khalsa, the Khalsa Akhbar, the Khalsa Samachar, the Khalsa Advocate and the
Sikhs and Sikhism helped a great deal in projecting the true image of Sikhism. The influence of these
periodicals was tremendous, and they greatly helped in quickening the pace of revival. They succeeded in
counteracting the attack of the Arya Samajists and the Christian Missionaries, who were misrepresenting the
teachings of the Sikh Gurus. These periodicals were run by persons like Giani Ditt Singh, Bhai Gurmukh
Singh, Bhai Mayya Singh, Bhagat Lakshman Singh, and Bhai Vir Singh, who had been nurtured in the Sikh
tradition.
People came in large numbers to receive amrit. A major plank of the Singh Sabha was a crusade of
Amrit Parchar, because to revive the institution of initiation and the connected doctrine of Nash, making a
complete break with all earlier religious and social traditions, was the best means of eliminating the
Brahminical practices that had appeared among the Sikh ranks. The Singh Sabha preachings being in line
with the earlier tradition, and having the sanction of the Gurus and the scripture, were accepted and acted
upon by all true Sikhs. In fact, the tremendous success the Singh Sabha revivalists had in bringing back
dynamism in the Sikh life, was entirely due to their ability to invoke the authority of the Sikh Gurus, Guru
Granth Sahib and the Sikh tradition in support of everything they said and preached. The chief pillars of the
movement, workers like Giani Ditt Singh, Bhai Gurmukh Singh, Bhai Mayya Singh, Bhai Jawahar Singh and
Bhagat Lakshman Singh, were very ordinary persons of hardly any consequence in the socio-economic or the
political life of the community. There was nothing to recommend them except their devotion to the cause of
the great tradition which the mass of the people understood very well. It would, therefore, be naive to
suggest that these simple Singh Sabha workers could have the capacity to impose on the community a new
system, or make innovations in the Sikh ideology or even a major reform, without their suggestions and
programme being strictly in line with the thesis of the Gurus, especially when many socially and politically
influential persons in the Sikh community continued to oppose them.”
The Chief Khalsa Diwan formed a sub-committee to suggest ways and means to reform the
gurdwaras that had gone into the hands of Brahminical priests and vested interests. But it could not take
effective measures because mahants and pujaris who controlled the gurdwaras enjoyed the support of the
Government.©? After this tussle, the wahants and the pujaris became hostile to the Singh Sabha leaders.” The
Sikh public was rudely awakened to the evil designs of the pwjaris when they condemned the Komagata Maru
Sikhs at the Akal Takht, and presented a robe of honour to General Dyer after the tragedy of Jalianwala
Bagh.”| This made the Sikhs furious. It took the Sikhs quite some time to get their shrines liberated from the
mahants and the pujaris.
Nevertheless, the Singh Sabha succeeded in renewing a sense of self-awareness among the Sikhs.
The movement, which derived its inspiration from the great spiritual heritage of the Gurus, did not ‘invent’
any standard of its own. It is highly incorrect, rather misleading, to attribute innovations to a movement
which was wholly revivalist in its nature and character. In fact, to propound a new ideology was against the
very basic principles of the Singh Sabha. A scholar, who sets out to study and understand the true nature of
Sikhism, should do so in the context of the Sikh scripture and the historical background of the emergence of
Sikhism. Oberoi’s assertion that Sikhism is first and foremost a peasant faith or rural religion, displays a
complete lack of knowledge and understanding of Guru Granth Sahib and the fundamentals of Sikhism.
This deficiency is common with those who use social-science methodology in studying a religion and its
history. Nowhere in the history of India or elsewhere in the world is there any evidence to suggest that the
peasantry could, on its own, devise a radically new religious system or sustain a social revolution of the kind
that took place in the Punjab.
Throughout the ages, Sikhism has shown a remarkable potency and will to grapple with all crises,
without compromising the basic and enduring values of its faith. It is through tremendous sacrifices and
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
sufferings, that the Sikhs have maintained their identity, ideals and ethos, and carried out the mission
entrusted to them by their Gurus. Their birth, training, tradition and history have marked them out as a
people separate from the rest. It is quite idle to draw simplistic conclusions about the Sikh religion and its
history without an in-depth study and analysis of the Sikh scripture and the role of each doctrine and
institution in shaping the Sikh movement and the revolutionary changes it brought about.
The study of the Singh Sabha Movement in isolation, and in complete disregard of the Sikh ideology
and the earlier Sikh history, apart from being methodically inadequate and faulty, shows very clearly the
failings of a narrow and lopsided approach. Lloyd has drawn a very interesting caricature of an
anthropological view which would first magnify a very narrow aspect of a social phenomenon and then try to
draw inferences thereftom. The social anthropologist who views religion as a social institution, quite often,
fails to take into account the socio-cultural complex, “constituted by institutions, rules, beliefs and
intentions”, and arrives at erroneous conclusions.” Lloyd has provided a rather amusing account of what a
tribal anthropologist might see, if he visited the Brighton beach in the middle of summer. The
anthropologist’s account, he says, may read somewhat like the following :
“The people of England are religious and devout worshippers of the sun. Each year they leave their
homes and travel to the coast for the purpose of worship, and often take up small accommodation in tents,
ot in what they call caravans, or live with other people during their short stay. Each day they begin worship
by prostrating themselves on the shingle in the heat of the sun, which is often so hot that they wear shields
over their eyes. Their bodies become burnt and some become ill, but few are deterred by this, such is their
devotion. At various times people will baptise themselves in the waters, calling to each other and waving
their arms in ecstacy. At midday, families group together when a symbolic ceremony takes place. Three-
cornered pieces of bread, known to the natives as ‘sandwiches’ are passed around and eaten. During the
afternoon they throw symbolic, large, inflated, multi-coloured orbs to one another, illustrating the dominance
of the sun in their lives. Throughout all this, elders lie motionless in their canvas seats with their faces
covered, in deep and prolonged meditation. These observances may continue for a family for upto fourteen
days, when they return to their work until the following year.”
Lloyd says that such an interpretation of what the people of Brighton beach were doing, seems quite
consistant with their physical movements. That is to say, if these people really were sun-worshipping, instead
of sun-bathing and enjoying themselves, their bodily movements may be no different. The difference lies in
how they saw their movements. What the anthropologist did not do, was to see things the way the natives
did, to entertain the ideas they had, to understand the significance that these things had for them. If we wish
to understand what a person is doing we have to understand not only his beliefs and intentions, but also the
socio-cultural context and institutions, norms and rules which provide the framework within which he forms
his purposes in terms of appraisal of his situation. Oberoi’s study is equally narrow and inept in its vision.
CONCLUSION
A lop-sided or isolated study of a few rituals and beliefs prevalent in a very small section of the
community during a particularly lean period cannot form the basis of a study of Sikhism and its ideology.
The worshipping of a ‘Sakhi Sarvar’ by less than three percent of ignorant and illiterate villagers or a similar
local aberration, cannot be regarded as the views and practices of the entire Sikh community, especially when
the Sikh scripture, tradition and writings had specifically and repeatedly condemned them, and when there
was hardly a trace of them in the Sikh community of the Guru period or of the 18th century.
People of different religions are quite often found harmonising together in social life and mutually
respecting, understanding and taking part in each other’s cultural activities. For example, Purdah system
which crept into the Hindu society bore the stamp of Muslim culture. It is misleading to draw inferences
about the form and dynamics of a religion on the basis of socio-cultural practices and usages, which are local
and temporary in character. A visitor to a Christian Sunday worship in a Punjabi village observed that “many
aspects of the worship were strongly influenced by Punjabi village culture, e.g., the timing of worship, taking
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
off shoes outside the church, the separation of the men from the women, the noise and informality of
worship, the music and musical instruments.”’”4 If some Sikhs and Muslims worshipped the Sakhi Sarvar, it
does not mean that Islam and Sikhism are not independent religions, or that such worship is native to the two
religions. “Saturnatia, the Roman winter festival of 17-21 December, provided the merriment, gift-giving and
candles typical of later Christmas holidays. Sun worship hung on in Roman Christianity, and Pope Leo I in
the middle of the fifth century, rebuked worshippers who turned round to bow to the sun before entering St.
Peter’s basilica, some pagan customs which were later Christianised, ...... In short, many pagan customs
continued in Christianity in one form or the other for centuries on end.’’?5
There are features which are particular to Punjab, and there are practices derived from the
surrounding culture, which give it a particular flavour not found in other parts of the world. Popular legends
of Heer-Ranjha, Sassi-Punnu and Sobhni Mahiwal (mentioned by Oberoi) which found mention in the Punjabi
literature placed no impediments in the recognition of Sikhism as an independent religion.
There are certain features of a culture which are local and temporal and cannot by any stretch be
deemed to be a part of the prevailing religious system. Just as the pop music that is a common feature of the
urban life of the Indian community today could not be called an integral part of the Brahminical religion, in
the same way, it would be wrong to characterise folk fables and love stories of Heer Ranjha, Sassi Punnu, etc.
as a part of the Sikh religion.
Our discussion of the four related aspects of the Singh Sabha Movement shows that while it played
an important and significant regenerative role during a lean period of Sikh history, it was wholly a revivalist
movement, working strictly within the parameters of the Sikh religion and its tradition. In fact, the very
reasons that it invoked the authority of the Gurus and Guru Granth Sahib, and placed before the public
examples of the Sikh society and Sikh heroes who had suffered and sacrificed for the principles of Sikh
religion, account for the success of the Singh Sabha leaders in safely and creditably steering the Sikh
community towards its goals.
Ibid., p. 1288.
Ibid., pp. 830.
Ibid., pp. 1412,
9. Ibid., pp. 1298.
10. Ibid., p. 1290.
11. Gurdev Singh: S7kh Tradition, (Chandigarh, 1986), p. 328.
12. Cunningham, J. D.: A Hustory of the Sikhs (Delhi, 1966); p. 64.
Bannerjee, Indubhushan : Evoultion of the Khalsa, Vol. I (Calcutta, 1962), p.116.
Also Daljeet Singh : Sikhism (New Delhi, 1979), pp. 285-286.
13. Cunningham, J. D.: op. cit., p. 75.
14. Guru Gobind Singh : Dasam Granth, Kabit Swayia, p. 712.
15. Ahmad Shah Batala : Tawarikh-i-Hind, A.H. 1233/A.D. 1818, pp. 405-6; Also printed in Z7kar-i-
Quruan-lbtida-i-Singhan-Wa-Mazhab-i-Eshan-Twarikh-Daftri-Sohan, Sohan Lal Suti.
16. Cunningham, J. D.: op. cit., pp.79-80.
Ganda Singh : Early European Accounts of the Sikhs (New Delhi, 1974), p.188.
17. Gupta, Hari Ram: Hastory of the Sikhs, Vol. HW, pp. 39-45; Also Vol. I, p. 281.
REFERENCES
1. Guru Granth Sahib: p. 129.
2. Ibid., p. 357.
3. Ibid., p. 556.
4. Ibid., p. 1243.
5. Ibid., p. 145.
6.
7.
8.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
18. Kohli, Sita Ram: Foreword to Umdat-Ut-Tawarikh of Sohan Lal Suri, Daftar IV, p. i.
19. Devi Prasad, Pandit : Gulshan-i-Punjab (Lukhnow 1872), p. 224.
See also Cunningham : op. cit., p. 301.
20. Census of India, 1921 (Punjab and Delhi), Vol. XV, Part I. p. 184.
21. Ibbeston, Denzil : Panjab Castes (Reprinted) (Patiala, 1970), p. 228.
Similar views are also expressed by Major R. Leech. For details see Leech, R.(Major) : Notes on the
Religion of the Sikhs and Other Sects Inhabiting the Punjab; Foreign Secret Proceedings, — Vol. 590, 6-
20, December 1845, 3712.
22. Nirankari, Man Singh : The Nirankaris As Harbinger of Sikhs Renaissance, article published in the
book entitled_A Prophecy Fulfilled (Amritsar, 1984), edited by the same author, p. 48.
23.Sahni, Ruchi Ram: The Gurdwara Reform Movement and the Sikh Awakening Jullundur, 1922), p.
34.
Also Bingley, A. H.: The Sikds (Reprint) (Patiala, 1970), p. 56.
24. The Khalsa Akhbar, Lahore, May 25, 1894.
25. Clark, Robert (Revd.) : Thirty Years of Missionary Work in Punjab and Sindh (Lahore, 1883), pp.
219-20, 224 and 246.
26. Guru Granth Sahib: p.1245.
27.Gurmukh Singh, Bhai : My Attempted Ex-communication From the Sikh Temples and the Khalsa
Community at Faridkot in 1897 (Lahore, 1898), pp. 2-3.
28. Macauliffe, M. A.: The Sikb Region, Vol. I, pp. 310 and 379.
29. Guru Granth Sahib : p. 1153.
30. Ibid., p. 310.
31. Macauliffe, M. A. : op. cit., Vol. II, pp. 7-8.
32. Ibid., p. 419.
33. Ibid, Vol. IV, pp. 147-49.
34. Ibid., pp. 339-40.
35. (Prahlad Singh), Rahitnama, edited by Piara Singh Padam, p. 55. Also Rahitnama (Daya Singh), p.
64.
36. Bhangu, Rattan Singh : Prachin Panth Parkash (ed.) Bhai Vir Singh, Amritsar, 1962 pp. 42 and 47.
37. Rose, H. A. : _A Glossary of the Tribes and Castes of the Punjab and North-West Frontier Province Vol. U1
(Reprint 1970, Patiala), pp. 436-437.
38. Daljit Singh : Singh Sabha de Modbi Giani Ditt Singh Ji, (Amritsar, 1951), pp. 72-73.
39. The Khalsa Akhbar, Lahore, September 30, 1898.
40. Petrie, D. : Memorandum on Recent Developments in Sikh Politics (Simla, August 11, 1911), The Panjab
Past and Present, Vol. IV, Part II (Patiala, October, 1970), pp. 310-11.
41. Koer Singh : Gurbilas Patshahi Das, p. 137; Macauliffe : op. cit., Vol. V, pp. 99-100. Also Jagjit
Singh : The Sikh Revolution (Chandigarh, 1981), p.177.
42. Macauliffe : op. cit., Vol. V, p. 218; Jagjit Singh : Ibid., p. 278.
43. Bharat Mukti Morcha, Punjab : The Sikh Case (Chandigarh, 1988). They have quoted Maulana
Abdul Kalam Azad as an evidence in support of these figures.
44, Akbar, M. J.: India: The Siege Within (London, 1985), pp. 307-8.
45. Ibid.
46. For details see Kahn Singh, Bhat; Ham Hindu Nahin (Reprint, Amritsar, 1973) and Ditt Singh,
Giani; Nakk Sikh Parbodh (Reprint, Amritsar, 1974).
47. Koer Singh : Gurbilas Patshahi Das (Patiala, 1968), pp. 136,143.
48. Padam, Piara Singh (edited), Rahitnama (Patiala, 1974), pp. 68-69.
49. Jagjit Singh : op. cit., pp. 291-92.
50. Ganda Singh : A History of the Khalsa College Amritsar, (Amritsar, 1949), p. 2.
51. Ibid.
52. Khem Singh Bedi’s followers called him Avtar (incarnation of God). For details see Avtar Singh
Vahiria, Bhai; Shok Pattar (Lahore 1905), p. 38.
53. The Khalsa Akhbar, Lahore, April 14, 1899.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
54. Petrie, D. op. cit., pp. 310-311.
55. Jagjit Singh: S7zagh Sabha Lehr (Tarn Tarn, 1941), pp. 16-17.
56. The Cwil and Military Gazette, Lahore, April 30, 1888; Petrie, D; op. cit., p. 311.
57. The Khalsa Akhbar, Lahore, November 18, 1898.
58. Jodh Singh, Bhai; Guru Sahib Ate Ved (Amritsar, n.d.) pp.15-20.
59. Gian Singh, Giant; Panth Parkash (Patiala, 1970), reprint, pp. 233-34.
60. Macauliffe’s Lecture, delivered at Simla and published in the Khalsa Akhbar, Lahore, August 14,
1903.
61. Teja Singh, Babu; Staghan Da Panth Niyara (Amritsar, 1900), pp. 1-5.
62. Lakshman Singh, Bhagat; Autobiography (edited by Ganda Singh), (Calcutta, 1965), pp. 142-143.
63. Census of India, 1921, Punjab and Delbi, Vol.XV, p. 171.
64. Talwar, KS. : The Anand Marriage Act. The Panjab Past and Present (October, 1968), Vol. H, p.
407.
65. Teja Singh : S7Rbism Its Ideals and Institutions (Calcutta 1938), pp. 38-39.
66. The Cwil and Military Gazette, Lahore , April 30, 1888.
67. Ibid.
68. Caveeshar, Sardul Singh : The Sikb Studies (Lahore, 1937), pp. 189-90.
69. Ibid.
70. Ibid.
71. Ibid.
72. Gautam, Satya P. : On Understanding Human Action, Paper read at a Seminar on Philosophical Theory
and Social Reality, January 18-22, 1982 available at Nehru Memorial Museum and Library, New
Delhi.
73. Lloyd, D. L : Nature of Man, in Philosophy and the Teacher edited by D.L.Lloyd, (London; Routlege
and Kegan Paul 1978), p. 36.
74.Caleb, Magbul : Chrisitan Sunday Worship In a Punjabi Village, an article published in a book
entitled, Popular Religion In the Punjab Today edited by Johan C. B. Webster (Delhi, 1974), p.
125.
75. Richard A. Todd. : Eerdsmans’ Handbook to the History of Christianity (Michigan, 1987) pp.
131-32.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
30
SIKHS AND THE BRITISH
GURDARSHAN SINGH DHILLON
Recently many scholars, especially in the West, have contended that the assertion of a distinct Sikh
identity in the mid-nineteenth century was very largely due to advertent support extended by the British. W.
H. McLeod holds that “there were several Sikh identities available during the period immediately following
the 1849 annexation and one such identity (the militant Khalsa version) was vigorously promoted by the
British in order to serve their own military purposes. The same identity was accepted by the stronger! of the
Singh Sabha leaders and became the focus of their reforming activities late in the nineteenth century.’
Richard Fox refers to the Sikhs in the Indian army “transmuted into Singhs by the British.” Scholars like N.
G. Barrier and Rajiv Kapur have also referred to the recruiting and organisational policy of the British Indian
army as the instrument for fostering the distinct Sikh identity. Rajiv Kapur observes : “Recruitment into the
army provided strong encouragement for the development and maintenance of a separate Sikh identity.’
Barrier> and Fox® both find themselves caught in an intricate and incoherent analysis of the British motives in
dealing with the Sikhs.
The Relevant Questions Are: Did not the Sikh leaders invoke the Sikh doctrine in the Guru Granth ?
Was it not inevitable for a Sikh movement, aimed at restoring the purity of Sikhism, to remove outside
accretions, including Hindu influences and make the Sikhs stand on their own ground un-encumbered ? Was
it not necessary for the Sikhs to go through a discipline of education in order to equip themselves for
participation in the political life ? Is it right to brand the Singh Sabha leaders as loyalists and accuse them of
misguiding the community to serve the ends of the British in India ? Did not the Sikhs have to wage a long
battle to maintain their religious institutions and practices and free their gurdwaras from the control of the
mahants and pujaris, who enjoyed the patronage and backing of the British ? Is it right or misleading for the
historians to talk of the role of the British military policy in promoting the Sikh identity and to make a
complete blackout of the Sikh ideology and four hunderd years of the Guru period and Sikh history ? How
can they turn a blind eye to the patronage extended by the British to the mabants (Priests) at the Sikh temples
who because of their background opposed the Sikh identity tooth and nail ?
In deriving some of their hasty and ill-conceived inferences, the writers fail to study the subject
methodically and to see the Sigh Sabha Movement and its work in the background of (a) the Sikh ideology,
(b) the method and history of the Sikh Gurus and the Sikh movement in the preceding three hundred and
fifty years, and (c) the general and overall historical perspective of ideological movements during their lean
periods. Therefore, in order to make a comprehensive and methodical study of the subject, we shall divide
our paper under the following heads : (i) the Sikh ideology, (ii) the preparatory period of educating and
motivating the masses, (iit) reviving institutions and centres of the faith to rebuild the Panth and its distinct
identity and the final stage of political preparation and struggle, (tv) realities of the situation after the
annexation of Punjab and factors hostile to Sikh identity, (v) the Simgh Sabha Movement and its plan of work,
activities and achievements, (vi) the preparatory stage leading to the second stage of Gurdwara Reform
Movement and participation in political struggle, (vii) general historical perspective, and (viii) conclusion.
First of all we shall take up the salient features of Sikh religion, especially where Sikhism made a
radical departure from the earlier religious traditions.
SIKH IDEOLOGY
Sikhism is a revelatory religion, which revolted against the religious hypocrisy of the Brahmins and
the political oppression of the contemporary rulers. Guru Nanak, the founder of the Sikh religion, stressed
the unity of God’ and the brotherhood of man.’ He attacked such pillars of the Hindu society as caste,°
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
idolatry,!° ritualism,'! asceticism!” and intermediary role of the priests'3 in man’s relations with God. His
spiritual thesis, with an inalienable social content, sought to establish equality, not only between man and
man, but also between man and woman. He welded the spiritual and the temporal planes of human existence
into a harmonious whole, and brought about reconciliation between the religious and the secular means for
achieving the best results in human affairs.'* The Guru’s followers were not required to chant Sanskrit sa/okas
before stone idols but sang hymns composed by the Guru himself in their mother tongue. They came to
have different places and modes of worship. It was not an easy task to confront the dogmatism of the priest-
dominated and caste-tidden Hindu society. The Guru brought about a far-reaching transformation in the
minds of the people through the institutions of Shabad, Sangat, Pangat, Guru-Ka-Langar, Guru and Dharamsal.
The three cardinal principles of Guru’s teachings were : ‘Kirt Karo’ (earn your bread through hard labour),
Vand Chhako’ (Share your earnings with others) and ‘Naam Japo’ (always remember God). This resulted in
building a separate and self-reliant community with new beliefs and institutions.
The ptocess of separation of identity was carried forward by the second Sikh Guru Angad. He
introduced the Gurmukhi script, in which he compiled Guru Nanak’s and his own compositions. The Guru
was opposed to mendicancy and parasitical living. He earned his own living by twisting coarse grass strings
used for cots. The third Guru Amar Das took many steps which tended to break further the affiliations of
the Sikhs with the Hindus. He introduced new forms of ceremonials for birth, death and marriage. He
deprecated the practice of ‘Purdah’ and ‘Sati’, encouraged inter-caste alliances and re-marriage of widows. He
declared that the Sikhs who were active householders were wholly separate from the passive and recluse
‘Udasis’ whom he excluded form the Sikh society. The Guru established twenty two new centres or parishes
(Manjis) for conveying the message of Guru Nanak to the people.
These centres were supposed to cater both to the religious and the empirical needs of the people.
Guru Ram Das, who succeeded him as the fourth Guru, acquired the site of the present city of Amritsar
which became the religious capital of the Sikhs. He had a tank dug, around which bazars or trading centres
were established.
Guru Arjun Dev, the fifth Guru, took some very important steps for fortifying the Sikh identity. He
raised the Harimandir, and gave to the Sikhs a central place and shrine of their own. This was to wean away
Sikhs from Hindu institutions like those at Hardwar, Varanasi, etc. He also gave the Sikhs a scripture of their
own in the form of Guru Granth Sahib, which they could read and understand. They did not require the help
of Brahmin priests to read out Sanskrit texts from the Vedas or the Upanishads, which they did not
understand. It was Guru Arjun, who very clearly and emphatically declared that the Sikhs were an
independent community :
“T do not keep the Hindu fast,
nor the Muslim Ramadan;
I serve Him alone who is my refuge,
IT serve the one Master who is also Allah,
I have broken with the Hindu and the Muslim,
I will not worship with the Hindu, nor like
The Mushm go to Mecca,
IT shall serve Him and no other,
I will not pray to idols nor say the Muslim prayer;
I shall put my heart at the feet of the One Supreme Being;
For we are neither Hindus nor Mussalmans’6
The Guru made, for the principles of his religion, the supreme sacrifice of his life, and became the
first martyr in Sikh history. Guru Arjun’s son and successor Guru Hargobind started military preparations.
His resort to arms was in keeping with the last instructions of his father. Guru Nanak too had rejected
Albimsa as an inviolable religious doctrine. Facing the Harimandar, Guru Hargobind built the Akal Takht, a
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
seat of the temporal authority as distinct from Harimandar Sahib, clearly signifying that the Sikhs owed their
primary allegiance to God. He also hoisted two flags before it as visible symbols of miri and piri, 1.e., the
temporal and the religious authorities. The concept of mri and piri was the natural and inevitable outcome of
the doctrine of the combination of the spiritual and the empirical, laid down by the first Guru. That this
combination is fundamental to the Sikh doctrine, is clear from the fact that in Sikhism the insignia for P77 or
spiritualism is a sword, and not a rosary. Many of the misunderstandings by scholars of Sikhism or its history
are due to their failure to have an adequate knowledge of the Sikh ideology. This lack of knowledge, or
sometimes bias, is quite apparent among scholars drawn from pacificist or dichotomous religions.
The ninth Sikh guru, Guru Tegh Bahadur suffered martyrdom to counter the forces of tyranny and
injustice and to uphold the freedom of man to practise his religion. He demonstrated that to lay down one’s
life in defence of righteousness was a paramount religious duty. When a report was sent to Emperor
Aurangzeb that the Guru was organising a people (millai), he offered to the Guru that if he confined his
activities to prayers and preachings, he would be given grants for the purpose, provided he gave up his
political activities. But the Guru declined the offer.'° The inspiration stemming from the creative vision of
Guru Nanak reached its climax under the tenth Guru, Gobind Singh. The ideal of Saint-Soldier implicit in
the Mi7-Piri doctrine of Guru Nanak fructified in the creation of the Khalsa of Guru Gobind Singh. It was
the objective of the Sikh society or Khalsa to restore justice and harmony in the prevailing state of affairs. He
created the Khalsa, a disciplined body of Sikhs, and conferred upon them a distinct personality. He gave
them a martial name ‘Singh’ (Lion), and prescribed five Rakar including &rpan and unshorn hair. In fact, the
tule about keeping unshorn hair started a debate, and those wanting to cut their hair and to follow Hindu
customs were automatically excluded from the Sikh society.!’ The symbols strengthened religious discipline,
gave external uniformity to the Sikh faith, and served as aids to the preservation of the corporate life of the
community. It is very important to remember that the egalitarian principle was an accepted and practised
norm of Sikh society. It is noteworthy that four out of the five Piaras (Beloved ones), who offered their
heads to the Guru, and were initiated were Shudras. He intended to make a complete break with the past
religious tradition through the introduction of the wash doctrine involving Kirtnash, Kulnash, Dharamnash,
Bharamnash and Karamnash,'® i.e., the giving up of all those beliefs, ideologies and practices that came in the
way of the sole worship of the One Supreme Being. The creation of the Khalsa was a unique phenomenon in
the annals of mankind. It was the epitome of the Sikh movement. There is no evidence, whatsoever, to
suggest that there was any other Sikh identity or society promoted by the Gurus or in existence in the
seventeenth or eighteenth century. The Guru raised the Indian spirit from servility, interiority, fatalism and
defeatism to the dynamic ideal of responsible reaction and resistance against tyranny and injustice. The
supreme acts of martyrdom of the Guru, his father, mother and four sons for the cause of righteousness left
an indelible stamp on the Sikh way of life. It is sheer idleness and mischief to think or suggest that the deep
seated moral conditioning created by the longest chain of martyrdoms and conscious struggles, could just be
re-created or affected by any wishful self-interest of the British or any other ruler. Such artificial creation of
religious identity is unknown to history.
During his lifetime Guru Gobind Singh chose Banda Singh Bahadur to conduct the final phase of
the Sikh struggle against the Mughal Empire. It was under his leadership that the Khalsa armies won decisive
victories and shook the very foundations of the mighty Mughal Empire. Banda struck coins in the name of
the Khalsa Panth. The inscriptions on the coins are significant :
“This coin is struck as a token of our sovereignty here and hereafter. This divine bounty flows from
the sword of Nanak (Tegh-7-Nanak) and the victory and felicity is the gift of Guru Gobind Singh, the king of
kings, the true master.”!9
This coin itself clearly signifies that in the consciousness of the Sikhs of those times, there was
complete unity of spirit and ideology between the first and the last Guru and in fact, among all Gurus. It
clearly shows that the concept about differences in the ideologies of the first and the tenth Guru is due to the
ignorance of some of the biased writers of the present day. Banda Bahadut’s seal also depicted similar
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
thought, ie., “Degh, the kettle for service; Tegh, the strength of the sword; and Fazh, the resultant victory,
received from Guru Nanak and Guru Gobind Singh.’
Under Banda’s inspiration, Sikhism became popluar with the people of Punjab. About one lac
persons embraced Sikhism. Banda and several hundered soldiers of the Khalsa army who were arrested, kept
their cool even in the face of death. None of them renounced his faith to save his life.2! They carried on the
glorious traditions of sacrifice and martyrdom for the cause of righteousness handed down to them by the
Gurus. Their blood created fertile soil for sprouting the seeds of Sikh glory. The Sikhs confronted the
hordes of Persian and Afghan invaders with the same religious spirit. This was a time when a price was put
on every Sikh head, and thrice it was reported to the authorities that the Sikhs had been exterminated root
and branch.” The imperial order for the elimination of the Sikhs was directed at the destruction of the
Nanakpanthis. It did not declare them as Sikhs or Singhs or the Khalsa. This clearly indicated that there was
no question of any multiple identities among the Sikhs in the eighteenth century. The clear teachings of the
ten Gurus and the fire of suffering and persecution had welded the Sikhs with a unity of ideals, ethos and
practices entirely different from those of the Hindu society with which they were surrounded. The Bani and
the Nash doctrine created the wall of division betweem them, and persecution and suffering cemented the
internal cohesion of the community as a distinct society. For the followers of the Gurus and their opponents,
there was only one community of Nanakpanthis, Sikhs or Khalsa whose sole founder was Guru Nanak. The
definition of a Sikh was very clear, without any scope for ambiguity. There was no question of any multiple
identities among the Sikhs.
After a long period of turmoil, suffering and persecution, the Sikhs rose to political power under
Ranjit Singh, who ruled under the banner of Sarkar-i-Khalsa. It was at this time that Hindus swelled the
ranks of the Khalsa in the hope of temporal gains. The population of the Sikhs, which at one time was
reported to be not more than twenty thousand in the 18th century now rose to the peak figure of 10-11 kbs
in the times of Ranjit Singh.%4 It was not so easy for these converts of convenience to shed some of their
beliefs and practices. Ranjit Singh had to spend most of his time in conquering and consolidating territories.
The result was that the Sikhs had hardly any time to set their house in order. It is evident that the large scale
increase in the Sikh population was due to the new entrants who had flocked to the new faith not out of
conviction but to put up an appearance of closer ties with the people in power.** There began a new phase of
Sikhism with new entrants to the Sikh fold. Their ways and customs were still overlaid with Hinduism. It
was very easy for them to slide back into their old faith when power did not rest with the community. This
was the first time in their history that the Sikhs could be divided into two categories, the first consisting of
those who nursed their traditional culture and carried in them the spirit to suffer and sacrifice for a righteous
cause, and the second comprising the new lot with hardly any strong commitment to the faith. During the
Guru and the post-Guru period there is no evidence, whatsoever, of the so called “multiple identities.”
During the phase of struggle and persecution in the 18th century, when to be a Sikh was to invite death, the
Sikhs never had any ambiguity about their identity or ideals created by the ten Nanaks. And both for the
insiders and outsiders there was a single community of society they had created. They kept the torch of
Sikhism ablaze through tremendous suffering and sacrifice.
POST-ANNEXATION PERIOD
With the fall of the Sikh kingdom, the new entrants to the Sikh fold started wavering in their loyalty
to Sikhism. The Sikhs had hardly had peace for one generation, when some of these new entrants reverted to
Hinduism and its old prejudices and practices.”® Still there were many for whom the border line between
Hinduism and Sikhism became very thin and vague, and they kept unsurely on the border line. In their
outlook, character and behaviour they stood clearly apart from the main segment of the Sikh society who had
a clear identity. The latter traced their lineage from the Guru period and had inherited the glorious tradition
of martyrdom for the cause of righteousness. With the emergence of the British as the new rulers, the
relationships between Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs underwent a complete change. In Punjab the Hindus, who
had looked upon the Sikhs as their protectors against the Muslims and were partners in power during the
years of triumphs under Ranjit Singh, showed hardly any commitment towards Sikhism that had successfully
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
fought battles for liberty and freedom of the land and its people. With both the Muslim threat and the Sikh
kingdom gone, the external pressures that had held them seemingly close to Sikhism disappeared. They had
to redefine their mutual relationship. Apart from this, the role of some members of the Hindu elites during
the period of annexation, a point which we shall detail later on, was far from creditable, and created some gap
between the two communities. It is note-worthy that the Hindu Dogras and Purbias during the crucial Anglo-
Sikh wars deserted the Khalsa army. On the other hand, the Muslim part of the Khalsa army fought against
the British till the end.?’ Tears at the defeat of Sarkar-i-Khalsa were shed by Shah Muhammad, the celebrated
Muslim poet.
The British looked upon the Sikhs as enemies, and initiated a policy aimed at the suppression of the
“War-like Sikhs”, with the help of an army of occupation comprising 60,000 soldiers and a police force of
15,000, largely manned by the Punjabi Muslims.”8 Special precautions were taken in policing the Majha area,
where Bhai Mehraj Singh and Narain Singh were reported to be active.” The royal house of the Sikhs was
completely destroyed. It is well-known that Maharani Jindan, called the “mother of the Khalsa,’ whom the
British considered to be the root cause of all trouble, was treated very shabbily and was forced to leave the
country.*0 The minor Maharaja Dalip Singh was made to resign “for himself, his heirs and successors, all
rights, title and claim to the sovereignty of the Punjab or to any sovereign power whatever.”?! The ‘Koh-i-
Noor’ considered by Dalhousie as a historical emblem of conquest in India, was ‘presented’ to the Queen of
England.*?
The Government confiscated all the valuables, including the antiques of the Sikh Raj from the
Toshakhana of the Maharaja, and also the estates of all those chiefs who had fought against the British in the
two Anglo-Sikh Wars. Some of them were exiled from the Punjab, and others were kept under surveillance
in their own houses. They were not allowed to keep arms in their possession.** Forts and defensive
fortifications — practically every Sikh village had defensive bastions — were levelled. All military grants to
the Sikh Jagirdars were abolished.** Henry Lawrence, as head of the Board of Control, responsible for the
administration of Punjab, recommended slight leniency towards the Sikh nobility. He thought and argued
that it was most impolitic and dangerous to deprive them of their rights unfairly. But, he was overruled by
Governor General Dalhousie, who in pursuance of his Imperialistic policies, thought that the “Jagirdars
deserved little but maintenance.”3° Henry Lawrence tendered his resignation over this issue.
Nearly 50,000 Sikh soldiers were disbanded.3’ Hardly a tenth of the old army of Punjab was taken
into the British pay. Although the term ‘Sikh’ was used for the re-employed soldiers, few were in fact Sikhs.
They were largely Punjabi Muslims, Gurkhas and Hindustanis of the Durbar army. The British officers
looked upon the Sikh soldiers with suspicion. They were called, “dirty sepoys’** and many officers wished
them to cut their hair “forgetting that the very essence of Sikhism lies in its locks.”° D. Pettie, an Assistant
Director, Criminal Intelligence, Government of India, in a Confindential report on the ‘Development of Sikh
Politics (1900-1911)’, wrote :
“The British adopted a very strict and rigid policy detrimental to the growth of Sikhism. After
annexation, the Golden Temple, Amritsar, alongwith 6 other gurdwaras and the gurdwara at Taran Taran,
were practically controlled by the British authorities through a Manager of these gurdwaras appointed by the
British Government. The Waqf Act of 1861 gave the control and management of the holy places of the
Hindus and Muslims to the communities concerned, but in the case of the Sikh gurdwaras, the Act was not
applied on political grounds. The properties of Sikh places of worship were transferred and given over to the
Udasi mahants and others, throughout the Punjab.” A significant blow was given by the British to the Sikh
religion when they conferred proprietory rights on the temple mahants, Brahmins, Udasis or Nirmalas,*| most
of whom had Hindu leanings and hardly understood or had faith in Sikh religion and its practices. This was
an extremely subtle method by which the British sought to secure the undoing of the ideological base of the
Sikhs. A committee of nine Sikhs with a Government nominated Sarbrah or Warden as its head was
appointed. After 1883, however, the Committee was quietly dropped, and the whole control came to be
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
vested in the Sarbrah who received his instructions from the Deputy Commissioner. The government
wanted to maintain the gurdwaras as channels of indirect control over the Sikhs.
The British rule dealt a severe blow to the socio-economic condition of the Sikhs. Thousands of
Sikh soldiers were rendered jobless. Because of earlier wars and consequent disturbances, the lot of the
peasantry was no better. Instead of the Sikhs, Hindus were preferred in the civil services. Most of the jobs in
military and police were given to the Punjabi Muslims. Out of the eleven Extra Assistant Commissioners,
appointed by the Board of Control, only one was a Sikh.
One wonders how in the face of all above historical facts, W. H. McLeod can make such a wild
statement as that “one Sikh identity was vigorously promoted by the British to serve their military purposes.”
The Christian missions which came to be established in Punjab, also generated a feeling of hatred
and hostility towards Sikhs. The Charter granted in 1600 by Queen Elizabeth of England to a Colonising
Company spoke of “duties higher than those of Commerce.’’+ If merchants must buy and sell, they must also
convert. Religious imperialism was the first phase of British Colonial imperialism. Christian Missions worked
under British political wings. The Missionaries established their centres at Amritsar, Tarn Taran, Batala,*
Ludhiana and Lahore.*6 Many Sikh students studying in Missionary schools began to despise the religion of
their forefathers.48 Some of them cut their hair and beards. The conversions of Maharaja Dalip Singh and
Raja Harnam Singh of Kapurthala were serious and deliberate blows at the roots of the community. Further,
the growing success of Missionaries in their evangelical work, with the support of the government, was an
overt measure against the Sikhs. Sir John Lawrence used to make annual contribution of Rupees five
hundred towards Missionary activities.” Some of the Missionaries openly condemned the Sikh institutions,
tradition and the Gurus. They called the Guru Granth a “heathen scripture.”5° The Administrative Report
(1849-51) noted: “The Sikh faith and ecclesiastical policy is rapidly going where Sikh political ascendency has
already gone ...... These men joined (Sikhism) in thousands and they now desert in equal numbers ...... The
sacred tank of Amritsar is less thronged than formerly, and the attendance at annual festivals is diminishing
yearly. Initiatory ceremony for adult persons is now rarely performed ...... Gurmukhi is rapidly falling into
desuetude. The Punjabi as a spoken language is also losing its currency and degenerating into a merely
provincial and rustic dialect.”>! A series of discreditable manouevres, interference with the local customs,
feverish activity of the Christian missions, and the attempts to westernise the Sikh culture filled the Sikhs with
alarm.
SIKHS AND THE MUTINY
During the Mutiny of 1857, the Muslims sought restoration of the rule of Muslim princes and rulers,
and the Hindus hoped to put the Maratha rulers back into power. The princes of the two communities had a
unity of purpose in putting up a common front against a common enemy, the British. Because of the earlier
British repression of the Sikhs, they were too disorganised to think of putting up a united leadership to
reclaim their lost kingdom. The community was leaderless.>* Moreover, the situation in the Punjab was quite
different from the one that prevailed in the rest of India. An important and the main factor was that the
Sikhs had nursed a serious grudge against the Purbias who, despite the Sikhs having never given them any
cause for offence, had by their betrayal and other overt and covert acts, helped the British during the Anglo-
Sikh wars and later in the annexation of Punjab. The British used the Sikh grievance and the consequent
“natural hatred” towards the Purbias. Kavi Khazan Singh in his work, ‘Jangnama Dill’, written in 1858,
mentions that the Sikh participation against the Pwrbia soldiers was in reaction to their boast that they had
vanquished the Sikhs in 1845-46 and in 1848-49.5> Another contemporary observer noted : “The animosity
between the Sikhs and the Purbias is notorious. The former gave out that they would not allow the latter to
pass through their country. It was, therefore, determined to take advantage of this ill-feeling and to stimulate
it by the offer of rewards for every Hindostanee sepoy who should be captured.’’+ The bitter memories of
Purbia co-operation with the British were so fresh in Sikh minds that any coalition between the two became
impossible. The people who now claimed to be fighters for freedom were the same who, eight years earlier,
had actively helped the British to usurp Sikh sovereignty. The pleas of Purbias were so hollow and
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
incongruous with their earlier conduct, that they fell on deaf ears of the aggrieved Punjabi Sikhs and Muslims
whose independence they had helped the British to rob. Besides, it is a well-accepted view that the risings in
1857 were just revolts by the princes to regain their feudal or territorial rights. It was far from being any
ideological struggle for any common Indian interest. In this context, the Sikhs in the background of their rule
in Punjab and egalitarian tradition could harldy be expected to side with Mulsim and Hindu princes to regain
their kingdoms, nor could religious taboos which affected Hindu and Muslim sentiments, against many of
which the Sikh Gurus had led a crusade, in any measure inflame Sikh sentiments. It was on account of all this
that the Punjab was not affected by the rebellion which convulsed the rest of northern India. Punjabi
Mussalmans turned a deaf ear to their Hindustani co-religionists’ exhortation of haa’ against the pig-eating
despoilers of Islam. Punjabi Hindus and, with greater reason, the Sikhs refused to listen to the belated appeal
to save Hindu Dharma from beef-eating foreigners who used cow fat to grease their cartridges.*° However,
there were stray cases of Sikhs joining the mutineers. It was reported that a large number of Sikhs gathered at
Ropar and declared the Khalsa Raj for which the leader of the band was immediately put to death. A Sikh
Chief, Raja Nahar Singh, was executed for supporting the cause of the rebels. After annexation Bhai Maharaj
Singh had moved from village to village in Majha region and incited the people to rebel.*°
The Cis-Satluj chiefs of Patiala, Malerkotla, Kalsia, Nabha, Faridkot and Jind, alongwith their
mercenary forces, rendered full help to the British in suppressing the rebellion. These chiefs owed their
existence to the British and were always outside the main Punjab, being hostile to Ranjit Singh. They still
remembered with gratitude the support extended to them by the British against Maharaja Ranjit Singh. But
for the British protection, Ranjit Singh would have overpowered them long ago. The British had guaranteed
them full protection ever since the proclamation of 1809 (Treaty of Amritsar). Very few scholars have
studied the role of the Sikhs in the Mutiny in its true historical perspective. In the opinion of M.A. Rahim :
“Disarmament of people, dismantling of fortifications, disbanding of the Khalsa Army, suppression of the
Sikh gentry, stationing of a large army and police in the Punjab, and various other measures were taken to
cow down the brave militant and turbulent Khalsa nation into humble submission ...... so that the Khalsa
may not be allowed to recover its prestige and reconstitute its army.’’>’ Similarly, Evans Bell believes that the
Khalsa was bound to feel discomfited, for their Gurus had been discredited and their union had been
dissolved.58
Although the Mutiny did not spread to the Punjab, the British did not look upon the Sikhs as
trustworthy. They knew that Punjab was still seething with disaffection. Therefore, they kept a strict vigil
over their fallen enemies. A big force consisting of 60,000 soldiers and 15,000 police personnel was stationed
in Punjab to exercise control in the event of an emergency. There was one soldier for every forty persons.
Thus, peace in Punjab was preserved at the point of the bayonet. A Government report of this time noted :
“A spirit of nationality and military ambition still survives in the minds and hearts of thousands among Sikhs.
It was vain to suppose that thoughts of future triumphs and future independence did not cross the
imagination of these people or that aspirations of restoring the Khalsa Raj were not excited during the
summer of 1857. Universal revolt in the Punjab would have broken out if Delhi had not fallen soon into our
hands.”5? Despite recruitment from Punjab, during and after the revolt, the total number of Sikh soldiers by
May, 1858 stood at 13,344 as against 20,027 Mohammandans.
As detailed above, it is evident that the Sikh soldiers who had joined the British army in 1857 were,
by and large, drawn from the cis-Satluj states, whose rulers during Ranjit Singh’s rule owed their very
existence to British bayonets, and who even during the Anglo-Sikh Wars were obviously sympathetic to the
British and not to the Sikhs. In fact, the Sikhs of Punjab were virtually segregated from the rest of India by
the intervening cis-Satluj states and the adjacent Hill and Dogra rulers, who had been traditionally pro-Delhi.
So far as the Hill-Rajas were concerned, their hostility towards the Gurus and the Sikhs dated from the
Mughal period.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
BRITISH POLICY AFTER THE MUTINY
With the transfer of authority from the East India Company to the Crown, it had become the
declared policy of the British to give due respect to the religious sensibilities of each community, to raise army
regiments on communal lines, to ensure that every community, and not the Sikh community alone, observed
its separate religious discipline. The immediate cause leading to the Mutiny had been the greased cartridges
smeared with the fat of cows and swines. This had outraged the feelings of both Hindus, to whom the cow
was sacred, and Muslims for whom the swine was unclean. The British Government had learnt a good
lesson, and its policy, in reference to Indian religions was radically altered. While deciding to raise regiments
on communal lines, the British also kept in view the prejudices of the caste Hindus, especially in matters
pertaining to eating from a common mess and living together under the same roof in military barracks.
Government not only maintained the religious identity of the units but also respected the religious taboos of
the soldiers, and even allowed each Brahmin to cook his food separately.®!
In the new native army the number of high castes was reduced. A soldier in each regiment was
required to take the oath of allegiance on his respective scripture by the help of his own priest at his own
place of worship. Soldiers were allowed to use their own communal wat-cries. This new policy was in no
way designed to further one religion at the cost of the other. A notable decision was taken to reduce the
number of native sepoys in the Indian army and to increase the strength of the European soldiers. There was
an overall decrease of 40 per cent in the total strength of the native soldiers but an increase of 60 per cent in
the number of European troops. It was an established principle of British policy for the period since 1858
that the native troops should not exceed more than 40 per cent of the total army.
Many scholars like Fox, Mcleod, Rajiv Kapur and Barrier have wrongly highlighted the recruiting
policy of the British in maintaining religious neutrality and freedom, as if this policy had only related to the
Sikhs. Actually as we have stated, it was a general policy regarding the maintenance of religious neutrality and
status quo concerning each community. It is, therefore, incorrect that the British policy either in any manner
related only to the Sikhs, or that it had introduced any religious practice that had not been in existence earlier
in the 18th and 19th centuries. It is, therefore, an idle prejudice to suggest that the British chose any
particular or Khalsa identity. In relation to every community the British accepted what was the authentic and
the typical. In fact, any partiality or prejudice in the choice of any sect would unnecessarily have raised
criticism, which the British wanted to avoid, being contrary to their new religious policy of neutrality. Here it
is relevant to give the statement of Henry Lawrence quoted by Barrier in his article, “The Punjab Government
and Communal Politics, 1870-1908’ : “My men are expected to extend equal rights to all native religions and
to align with none.’ On the basis of the above statement and other facts Barrier concludes that “the first
Punjab administration thus responded to a communal problem with religious impartiality.” In fact the
burden of his entire article is to suggest British neutrality towards different religious communities in the
Punjab and defend them against the charge of creating communal divisions. It is difficult to understand what
climatic change has occurred or what interests have over-weighed with the same author that later he writes
that, “the British also played an important role by supporting the maintenance of separate Sikh identity for
military purposes.”°+ Because, it is normally unusual for an author to give on the one hand a clean chit to the
British for their avowed and practical neutrality towards the three communities in Punjab, and, on the other
hand, strongly to endorse the oft-repeated charge of Hindu politicians that the Hindu-Sikh divide in the
Punjab is a British creation to serve their partisan interests. Besides, this religious policy regarding various
communities had been formulated by the British long before the publication of pamphlets by the Singh Sabha
at the fag end of the 19th century. Here it is very important to mention that the British religious policies
regarding communal practices in the army were strictly governed by their own self-interest, so as to maintain
the loyalty of the soldiers. The important and authentic fact is that both for the Muslim rulers of the 16th to
18th centuries and the British rulers of the 19th century, there was only one reality or identity, namely the
Sikhs, Nanakpanthis or Khalsa with which they battled or dealt with. Any other identity existed neither in the
field of religion, society, politics nor even in fiction or imagination. The religious realities the British found,
were dealt with uniformly by their new religious policy; they did not choose any one, ignore anyone, or
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
promote any one. It is only the split vision of some interested modern writers that raises the phantoms of
plural images, which, for the rulers and historians of the time, were non-existent.
But the British knew full well that the centres of Sikh strength and inspiration were their scripture,
ideology and gurdwaras. In fact, the British were very vigilant and particular in ensuring that the Sikh
gurdwaras were kept in the hands of the Hindu mahants and pwyaris, so that the Sikhs who were traditionally
known to draw their religious vigour, vitality and inspiration from their holy places, (some of which were
associated with the martyrdoms and struggles of the Gurus against the rulers) were, through their appointed
managers, segregated from these centres of inspiration.
Recruitment to the army was made, keeping in view, the qualities of fine physique and a military
background and tradition. The British, no doubt, had preference for martial races, but the Sikhs were not the
only martial race recruited in the Indian army. There were many Muslim tribes and Hindu castes like the
Pathans and Dogta Rajputs with martial traditions, who provided good recruiting grounds for the British.
This is amply borne out by a contemporary report in the Army Book :
“At present the Sikhs, together with the other inhabitants of the Punjab, whether Hindu, as the
Dogtra (Rajputs), or Mohammadan as the Punjabi Musalmans, and the Pathan Musalmans, the latter being
descendants of Afghan or other Asiatic invaders of India, are reckoned among our best and most willing
soldiers.” M. S. Leigh observes : “Although the Sikhs produced a percentage of recruits during the First
World War greatly in excess of their percentage in the population of Punjab, the fact remains that out of the
370,609 combatants recruited from Punjab, 190,078 (51.4%) were Moslems and “only” 97,016 (26%) were
Sikhs.”
In fact, the lower Hindu contribution to recruits is not due to any selective policy of the
Government, but is due to the Hindu population in Punjab being largely urban and well-off in trading and
business, and, for that matter, being reluctant by tradition to accept risks and hazards of a military career.
ATTACK ON SIKH IDENTITY
The Government of India Act of 1858, which transferred the authority from the East India
Company to the Crown, brought the Sikhs directly under the Imperial rule. After the loss of political power,
a sense of despair pervaded the Sikh society. An editorial in the Khalsa Advocate sams up the situation :
“False Gurus grew up in great numbers whose only business was to fleece their flock and pamper
their own self-agerandisement. Properly speaking, there was no Sikhism. Belief in the Guru was gone. The
idea of brotherhood in the Panth was discarded.’
Under the circumstances the discerning Sikh mind knew full well that while the chances of engaging
themselves successfully in a political battle with the British were slim, it was essential to invoke and
strengthen its religious base which was their very source of zeal and vigour.
The advent of Christian missions and spread of western education and science also provoked self-
understanding. Naturally, the Sikh mind looked back on its history and ideology with a clear self-discerning
eye.
The ideologically and politically conscious wing of the Sikhs was being calculatedly curbed and kept
under virtual surveillance. It was a tremendous task to revive the purity of the Sikh doctrine and to rid the
faith and its institutions of wrong accretions and adulterations in order to maintain their independence. It
was under great difficulties that the Sikhs started their struggle for survival in the mid-nineteenth century.
They rightly realised that before they could consciously and usefully start any political struggle with the British
masters, they had to revive and reinvigorate their religious understanding and discipline. Like the Sikh Gurus,
who had undone the social and religious trammels of Hindu dogmatism, and created new motivations and
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
traditions in the Sikh society before preparing and taking up the struggle against political oppression, the
Sikhs at this time decided first to reinforce their socio-religious base and strength before taking up the
political challenges.
Contrary to what is generally imagined, the fall of the Sikh kingdom was an episode in the turbulent
history of the Sikhs, rather than the close of an epoch. The proudest outcome of the apparent disaster was
that it forced Sikhism to exist on the strength of its own ideology and tradition. The period between 1849
and the rise of the Singh Sabha was a time of acute pain, trauma, distress, confusion and even of some
despair in the Sikh society, which had to face multifarious problems. The British were too conscious to
ignore the political potential of their foe that had given them the greatest challenge. Obviously, they were
keen that the political objectives of the community should be kept permanently frustrated. To this end, they
had taken away and converted the Sikh Maharaja Dalip Singh and virtually exiled the entire family of Ranjit
Singh. Similarly, the principal political Sardars were also curbed or hunted out. Such a step was natural for
an erstwhile victor and the Sikhs had no illusions in this regard. The British knew very well that the entire
vigour and strength of the Sikhs lay in their religious zeal, and that it was their religion from which they
derived their entire inspiration and power. Therefore, with their uncanny understanding they made sure that
the Sikh religious places were kept in hands that were hostile to the thesis of the Gurus and which sought to
divert them to the ritualistic maze of Hinduism.®
The contrast is very significant. Whereas the British restored the territory and kingdoms of some
princes and persons who had revolted during the British rule, they made sure that none from the family of
the Maharaja or the Sikh Sardars were allowed to have an opportunity to regain the leadership of the Khalsa,
because in the case of the Sikhs, they knew, they were dealing not with individuals, but with a people or a
nation imbued with an ideology of liberty and independence. The Sikh princes left intact were those who had
always been non-leaders of the community and outside the pale of Sarkar-i-Khalsa.
The second part of the attack on the Sikh religion was the arrival of Christian missionaries in the
heart of Central Punjab under the political wings of the British. Their activites and propaganda as already
indicated, were significantly subversive to the Sikh religion. In fact, the Missionaries sought in every way to
facilitate the colonial expansion of Britain by objectively acting as agents for their country’s big capital. They
were often unoffical consuls.
Third is the process and thinking that starts at the time of a ship feared to be sinking. As the bulk of
converts of convenience were from Hinduism, most of whom had neither shed their old practices and
prejudices nor their socio-ritual connections with their parent community, they started reversion to that fold
as also revival of their affinities with the Hindus. That this trend took the form of a serious attack on
Sikhism, is evident from the virulent activities of Pt. Sharda Ram Phillauri, a top Sanatanist Hindu leader
considered to be an agent of the British. He spoke even from the precincts of the Darbar Sahib,® with the
cooperation of British nominees in charge of it. With the rise of the Arya Samaj he also started propaganda
against the Sikh religion and vicious personal attacks on the Gurus. Phillauri delivered a series of lectures at
Jallianwala Bagh, Amritsar, in which he made disparaging remarks against all the Sikh Gurus.” He also
published a book entitled Sikhan De Raj Di Vithya, in which he misinterpreted the teachings of the Sikh
Gurus.”! The book was prescribed in the Oriental College, Lahore, as a subject of study.”* Such distorted
accounts of Sikhism and Sikh history undermined the prestige of the community. And all this could not
happen without the British patronage. Though the British were on the one hand claiming a policy of
neutrality towards Indian religions, they were fully and approvingly aware of this multi-pronged attack on the
Sikh source of strength, their religious places and their ideology.
The reality is that both the Mughal and the British rulers were well aware of this intimate connection
between the life-affirming moral zeal of the Sikhs and their religion and places of worship. In the past too,
with this awareness’? in mind, the Afghan invaders led by Ahmed Shah Abdali sought to destroy the Darbar
Sahib and fill up its sacred tank.” Similarly, Massa Ranghar tried to have his indulgent orgies at the sacred
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
centre of Sikhism.” The British also tried to weaken the religious base of the Sikh community by extending
support to the pro-Hindu mabants and puyaris of the Sikh gurdwaras.”
In the beginning of 1873 four Sikh students of the Mission High School, Amritsar, under the
influence of the Missionaries, offered themselves to be converted to Christianity.” There were protest
meetings all over the province and prominent Sikh leaders persuaded the boys not to abandon their faith.
But the incident served as an eye-opener to the Sikhs. In this state of affairs the traditional Sikh ethos was
bound to react.
BIRTH OF THE SINGH SABHA
With a view to mustering forces for an all round Panthic uplift, some prominent Sikhs including
Harsha Singh Dhupia, Thakur Singh Sandhawalia, Baba Sir Khem Singh Bedi and Raja Bikram Singh
Kapurthala, convened a meeting in Amritsar in July, 1873. The meeting was attended by leading Sikh chiefs,
Sardars, Gianis, pujaris and mabants of the Sikh gurdwaras of Amritsar and the adjoining districts.”* The new
association, Sri Guru Singh Sabha, Amritsar, was formed on July 28,1873. The object of the Singh Sabha
was to take up social, religious and educational programmes.*? But most of the leaders of the Amritsar Singh
Sabha being drawn from the rich, the upper, the privileged and the British supported strata of Sikh society,
were not teady to shed their old prejudices against the low-caste Sikhs. They sided with the mabants and
pwjaris in discriminating against them. This created a gulf between the high and the low-caste Sikhs and, thus,
the movement failed to gain the support of the masses because this behaviour of the mahants and pujaris was
clearly contrary to the basic tenets and practises of Sikhism.*! Baba Khem Singh Bedi tried to wield absolute
control over the activities of the Sabha. Being a direct descendant of Guru Nanak, he aspired after reverence
due to a Guru, and claimed some privileges. His followers called him avtar (Incarnation of God).** He wanted
a well-furnished seat (gvde/a) for himself even in the presence of the Holy Granth.®? This shocked Sikh
sentiments.*4
The Amritsar group adopted and approved anti-Sikh practices like discrimination, and personal
worship, and made ideological distortions.*> Naturally, persons conversant with the Sikh tradition objected to
all such aberrations resulting in a schism and the formation of the Lahore Singh Sabha in November 1879.86
It is significant to say that the chief organisers of this Sabha Prof. Gurmukh Singh and Giani Ditt Singh were
devoted Sikhs with humble beginnings, whereas the Amritsar group was clearly British backed. The Lahore
Singh Sabha developed a broad and comprehensive outlook, making no distinction between the high and
low-caste Sikhs and extending its activities both to the urban and rural masses of Punjab. They preached and
practised Sikh value systems as required by Guru Granth Sahib. They strongly opposed the institution of
human worship and regarded all men as equals.8’ They judged a man by his worth and not by his birth. Prof.
Gurmukh Singh made an appeal to the Sikhs of all castes and classes, to enlist themselves as volunteers of the
newly formed Sabha and to carry its message to every nook and corner of the Punjab.**
The religious revival under the Singh Sabha was a protest against forms and ceremonies and class
distinctions based on birth. It was ethical in its preference for a pure heart, the law of love, and good deeds.
This religious revival was the work of the people, of the masses, and not of the classes. At its head were
leaders like Ditt Singh, Gurmukh Singh and others, who sprang chiefly from the lower orders of the society
— Ramdasias, weavers, cooks, clerks, shopkeepers and peasants, rather than the gilded gentry. Thus, the gulf
between the privileged and British-backed, and the Sikh oriented groups started and continued. And, it is this
basic difference which some of the scholars ignore.
Whereas the appeal of the Amritsar Singh Sabha was mostly confined to the personal pockets of
influence of its leaders, that of the Lahore Singh Sabha went further and touched the hearts of the general
mass of the community. The Lahore party sent its Parcharaks (preachers) even in the interior of the State to
spread the message of Sikhism among hundreds and thousands of the village folks, who constituted the
backbone of the Sikh community and without whose cooperation no movement could acquire a mass base.
Simultaneously, the Lahore Singh Sabha opened branches in many towns. By 1882, the Singh Sabhas sprang
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
up at places like Peshawar, Bannu, Kohat, Abotabad, Jullundur, Gujranwala, Lyallpur, Patiala, Simla, Jhelum,
Ludhiana, Ambala, Quetta, Multan and Jind.*? Lahore Singh Sabha served as a model for all these Sabhas.
Since the Lahore Singh Sabha was working in line with the Sikh tradition, and the Amritsar Singh Sabha
office bearers were concerned only in maintaining their own personal position and privileges,very soon,
except for three Singh Sabhas, all rural and urban Singh Sabhas joined the Lahore Sabha.”?
McLeod calls the section of the Singh Sabha that promoted the Sikh identity the “stronger” one.
This statement begs the question. The real question to answer, which McLeod avoids, is why it proved to be
the stronger, the better and the wiser leadership. For there is no reason to assume that the Lahore Singh
Sabha was in material respects more influential. In fact, from the angle of social status, and available
resources, the Lahore Singh Sabhaites were men of meagre means, and belonged to the lowest class and
castes. On the other hand, the Amritsar Singh Sabha belonged to the gilded gentry including Knights and
Princes, who looked to the British as their patrons. Thus, if the British had their way they would have their
designs executed through their own and rich loyalists who looked up to them both for their gained strength
and future prospects. By none of the normal socio-economic factors can the Lahore Singh Sahba be called
the stronger one. What McLeod seems to conceal by calling them stronger is the moral strength and sap
which they drew from Guru Granth Sahib and the lives of the Gurus. Hence McLeod’s own reluctant
admission of the strength of the Lahore Singh Sabha demolishes the very basis of his argument that the Sikh
identity which the Lahore party espoused was either a created or a planted one, and not the only original one.
Mcleod seems to conceal the fact, of which he could not be unaware, that originally the only Singh Sabha
with all its branches was headed by the rich and gilded gentry. It was only later that, on ideological grounds,
some juniors and unprivileged members broke away from it and formed the Lahore Singh Sabha.
No political, economic or social factor in any sense contributed to its growth, and spread, except its
ability to invoke the Sikh doctrines in Guru Granth Sahib. It is still later that all except three branches of the
old Singh Sabha shifted their affiliation from the old to the new Singh Sabha. We do not think it is fair for a
scholar to suppress or omit such a fact and to suggest to the reader that the British supported the Lahore
Singh Sabha because it was the “stronger” one. The Lahore Sabha’s appeal to the masses lay in the Sikh
doctrines and not in any material, British or social factor. It appears the author has been unable to shed the
conditioned bias that is naturally associated with long years of functioning in Christian organisations in
Punjab.
Again, there arose a schism in the first meeting of the newly constituted Khalsa Diwan (on April 11,
1883), when Baba Khem Singh Bedi suggested that the title of the Singh Sabha should be changed to Sikh
Singh Sabhas.?! The object was to include the Se/ydbari Sikhs. But the proposal was considered motivated,
being only a method to include under this garb Hindu followers of the gilded Bedis. It was straightaway
opposed and rejected outright. At this time, these Bedis along with Thakur Singh Sandhawalia and their
followets were inspired by their personal interests.°? As things were, it would have been naive to hope that
any worthwhile political rebellion could be organised in the State. For, the British with their experience of
1857 were quite cautious and alert.
The Baba desired to assume the role of a spiritual guide and the Raja aspired to become the temporal
head of the whole community. The Baba was, therefore, ready to allow some laxity in maintaining the five
symbols.** The Lahore group maintained that Sikhism was, as proclaimed by the Guru Granth, the Gurus and
the Sikh tradition. They laid emphasis on Radit prescribed by the Tenth Guru. They did not tolerate any
attempted ideological compromise with Hinduism.”
The activities of the Singh Sabha were focussed on the eradication of un-Sikh like customs and social
evils and the encouragement of modern education of both men and women. The revivalist impulse stirred
the Sikhs to an awareness of their faith, and impelled them to resuscitate the essential contents of Sikh beliefs.
It was a trying time for the Sikhs, because their religion was under serious attack from the resurgent Arya
Samaj section of the Hindus.% In this context, the move of the Amritsar Singh Sabha to own and promote
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Hindu practices among their followers had to be repelled as a serious departure from the Sikh tradition.
Hence, the Lahore Singh Sabha had to fight on many fronts, against the Arya Samaj, against the Christian
missionaries, against the British-backed elite of their own community, and against the corruption of the
British patronised mabants and pujaris who practised anti-Sikh rites at the sacred Sikh shrines. The Sikh
literature was collected, scanned, edited and compiled. Amongst these was Bhai Kahn Singh’s well-known
work Mahan Kosh and the Ham Hindu Nahin We are not Hindus) as a rejoinder to the Arya Samaj propaganda
that the Sikhs were a branch of the Hindus.
The British government at this time was also ready to “encourage freedom of thought, ideas of
reforms on modern lines and even social revolt so long as these did not touch the dangerous ground of
politics.”°’ The Government appreciated the diversion of people’s attention from politics to religious and
social reform. It refrained from adopting any such policy as would further antagonise the Sikhs, arouse their
military instincts, and remind them of their lost glory. The following remarks of Lord Lawrence are note-
worthy in this connection: “The Sikhs were the bravest and the most chivalrous race in India and they now
seemed disposed to submit with manly self restraint to our superior power, if only we use it with equity and
toleration.’’°8
The British were extra cautious in dealing with the Sikhs and this is borne out by the observaion of
Sit Richard Temple : “Sikhism, though quiet and loyal at present, is one of those inflammable things of
which a spark might kindle into a flame. Its idiosyncrasy and susceptibilities are thoroughly understood by
the Punjab authorities and its fidelity to the Empire is well preserved. It would stand proof against many
trials and temptations, but if tried over much, it would re-assert itself and would assume the leadership of a
national movement.””? This emphasizes two important realities of the day. First, that Sikhism was not an
amorphous, ambiguous or confused and dispersed reality. Because of its ideology and a community having
been welded into a society of religious heroes, and its history of suffering and martyrdoms, under the severest
trials, it was a society with the greatest potential. This is the assessment of an important erstwhile adversary.
Secondly, his objective which is clear enough, is to see that the enormous potential does not get to be used or
exploited against them. For that matter, while it was natural, as we shall see, for the adversary slowly to erode
that potential, Temple suggests that it would be unwise unnecessarily to provoke the Sikhs regarding minor
issues, lest the inflammable material should explode against them. Accordingly, it would be naive for any
historian not to understand the British policies and the course of events or ignore the assessment of the chief
British actors of the time.
Sit Richard Temple’s expression of British policy is extremely revealing of the British mind. So far as
the Sikhs were concerned they very well understood the natural and logical basis of that policy, namely, that
while the British would not mind helping and placating the Sikhs on minor and non-essential issues, they
would never tolerate any subversion of their political interests. It is for this reason that both the Singh
Sabhas had incorporated a clause in their constitutions that they would not indulge in political matters.
POLITICAL SUPPRESSION OF THE SIKHS
The last quarter of the nineteenth century was primarily devoted to reviving the strength of the
community by educating them in their religion and tradition. The main emphasis was in social and religious
fields. Having discreetly reconstructed these aspects of Sikh society, slowly and surely the Singh Sabha
Movement took up the political problems as well. With the formation of the Chief Khalsa Diwan in 1902,
there came a significant change in the attitude of the Singh Sabha leaders towards politics. In the beginning
of the twentieth century, the rising tide of political consciousness and the new born awareness arising from
the regeneration brought about by the Singh Sabha Movement, prompted the leaders of the Chief Khalsa
Diwan to play their role in the political life of the province. They took it upon themselves “to safeguard the
political rights of the Sikhs.’?100
The passing of the Universities Act, in 1904, which required greater official control over the
management of the Khalsa College, Amritsar, made the Diwan leaders sceptical of British intentions.!0! Even
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
the proposal of the Government to give an annual grant of Rupees ten thousand to the College, which
provided that the constitution of the managing body was to be maintained according to the wishes of the
Government, was viewed to be fraught with mischief. In 1907, a fresh controversy erupted when the
Government forced Sardar Dharam Singh, who was working in an honorary capacity as the Engineer-in-
charge of the college, to be replaced by a European engineer, Major Hill. The College Managing Comittee
dissociated itself from the activities of this Government appointed Engineer. This resulted in a direct
confrontation between the College Governing Council and the Government. The Punjab, Lahore, in its issue
dated May, 1, 1908, observed : “one can imagine the plight of students studying in Khalsa College whose
management is going to be dominated by the Christians.” The government authorities handed over the
management of the College to a nominated body with the Commissioner as Chairman, and later on June 10,
1908 forced a new constitution on the Governing Body.
In November 1908, one member of the House of Commons raised a question in the British
Parliament, whether the Government of India was aware of the fact that the new management of the Khalsa
College had created resentment among the Sikhs and whether the government was doing anything to remove
this resentment.! Master Sunder Singh of Lyallpur wrote a book, Ki Khalsa Kalaj Sikhan Da Hai? in which
he clearly stated that the government control over the Khalsa College had hurt the national pride of the Sikhs.
He accused the British of having taken over the college in the same dishonest manner as it had annexed the
Punjab.'% D. Petrie, Assistant Director, Criminal Intelligence, mentions the sentiments of a Sikh student of
Khalsa College, who after the Amritsar Educational Conference expressed himself as follows :
“T am not afraid to die. All life is sacrifice. If I had been allowed to live, I might have done great
things by sacrifice. Until the nation realises that, lives must be sacrificed, it will never come to anything.’’!0+
Petrie also stated that a Khalsa College student had been openly advising people in his village not to
serve the British Government any more.
The year 1907 saw the beginning of a political agitation in the Punjab in connection with the
Colonisation Bill of 1907, which was considered to be unduly oppressive to the Punjabi agriculturists. The
Bill was passed on the assumption that the land was the property of the Government and the farmer was a
mere tenant.This was contrary to the prevailing notions of peasant-proprietorship, continuing from the times
of Banda Bahadur. The districts most affected by the new measure were Lyallpur and Rawalpindi, mainly
colonised by the Sikhs. Some Singh Sabha preachers (Updeshaks) like Jagat Singh Updeshak and Harbans
Singh Attari, were accused by the Government of instigating the agriculturists against the authorities.! The
students of Khalsa College Amritsar also organised a protest demonstration against Sir Charles Rivaz, the Lt.
Governor of the Punjab.!% The agitation over the Colonisation Bill was an important event. The chief
strength of the Sikhs was a bold peasantry that possessed proprietory rights in their lands. This was an
important Sikh reform different from the Zimindari system in most other parts of India. Under the
Colonisation Bill, the British proposed that the peasants would not have the proprietory rights which they
had during the Sikh rule. This was felt to be an important step to reduce the economic, social and political
strength of the colonists, most of whom were Sikhs. They reacted against this contemplated erosion of their
socio-economic base. This reaction of the Sikh colonists is significant, because it was based on the Sikh
tradition that it was Banda Bahadur, who had introduced the system of peasant proprietorship and created
among the masses a real consciousness of equality and the strength to defend their rights.
The founding of the Sikh Education Conference by the Chief Khalsa Diwan, in 1908, was also
viewed by the Government to be fraught with political motives.'!°’ It was alleged that “the Conference was
founded by the Chief Khalsa Diwan, which resenting Government’s interference in Khalsa College affairs in
1908, resolved to build a new Sikh College independent of Government control and devised in the
Conference a means of collecting funds for this object.”!°° Though declared to be a non-political institution,
the Sikh Educational Conference did provide a forum to the Singh Sabha leaders to express their views on
day-to-day affairs — religious, social, educational and even political. Some of the speeches delivered at
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
various conferences by the Chief Khalsa Diwan leaders were thought to be marked with strong political bias.
At the third Sikh Educational Conference held at Amritsar in 1910, Professor Jodh Singh of the Khalsa
College Amritsar was charged with giving a ‘seditious talk’ in connection with the government system of
education.' The British Government also began to view the activities of Sunder Singh Majithia, Tarlochan
Singh (Pleader), Professor Jodh Singh and Harbans Singh Attari with suspicion.'!!° The authorities also
noticed that teachers like Nihal Singh, Sunder Singh, Niranjan Singh, Hari Singh Cheema and others were
openly provoking the students against the British.!!!
It was said that in the course of their lectures these teachers, quite often, referred to the days of Sikh
ascendancy, their past glory and their present subjugation.'!? The students were so much excited that, in 1910,
when R. G. Wright took over as the Principal of the Khalsa College, they expressed their resentment against
an Englishman’s appointment by pasting handbills on the College walls.!! On another occasion, when Gopal
Krishan Gokhale came to Amritsar, he was given a hearty welcome by the students of the Khalsa College.
Their enthusiasm was reflected in the fact that they even unyoked his horses and themselves pulled his
cartiage to the College, where his lecture was listened to with thunderous applause.!"4
The British acted in defiance of the Sikh sentiments and interests. The Minto-Morlay Reforms, of
1909, were discriminatory against the Sikhs. The Muslim minority was conceded separate representation and
weightage in the State where they were a minority, as well as at the Centre. Similar consideration was not
shown to the Sikhs in Punjab. This shows that the British were always niggardly, when it was a question of
promoting Sikh political interests. Hardly were they given the same treatment as the Muslim minority. The
series of events outlined above show that the British were most reluctant to adopt policies that would build
the real strength of the community.
The Khalsa Advocate, Amritsar, which was the chief spokesman of the Chief Khalsa Diwan, was
administered warning three times, between 1911 and 1922, for printing ‘objectionable matters.”!!5 Khalsa
Samachar, Amritsar, in one of its issues, delivered the following message to the Sikhs on the occasion of Guru
Gobind Singh’s birthday : “The founder of the Khalsa, Guru Gobind Singh, fought against tyranny and
oppression and expelled darkness. He sacrificed his life for the cause of justice and righteousness. O’brave
Khalsa 2? Wake up! Follow in the Guru’s footsteps. The country is again in the throes of tyranny and needs
sacrifices.””!16
It was not an easy task for the Singh Sabha to restore the values and objectives of the Sikh faith, in
view of the stern posture adopted by the British at every step. The Arms Act of 1878, had placed a check on
the rights of the Sikhs to wear kirpan (Sword), which is one of the five essential symbols of the Sikh faith.
The movement for emancipation of the &/rpan was started in 1913, when Baba Nihal Singh was arrested for
wearing a Rirpan.'7
The incident sent a wave of indignation among the Sikhs. The Chief Khalsa Diwan and the Singh
Sabha held hundreds of meetings. Consequently, an agitation was launched. After some Sikhs had suffered
arrests, the Government exempted these Sikhs from the Arms Act, allowed them the possession and the
wearing of the &irpan on June 25, 1914.''8 In spite of the exemption of wearing the &/rpan, the Sikh soldiers
were still not allowed to wear it in the army. Three soldiers at Roorkee were punished and dismissed for
wearing it. The Singh Sabhas held protest meetings, but they were not taken back. Bhai Mangal Singh of the
34th Sikh Regiment, who was afterwards martyred at Nankana Sahib, was dismissed and sentenced to one
year’s rigorous imprisonment (R.L) for the same fault. It was only after the First World War, that the
Government sanctioned the wearing of A/rpans by Sikh soldiers, both in uniform and plain clothes, while
serving on the active list.!!? McLeod seems unaware of the &/rpan agitation, when he states that the British
required the “Sikh recruits to observe the full regalia of the orthodox Khalsa identity.”!2° Fox, too, suffers
from a similar mis-conception, when he says that the Sikh identity and their religious values were subsidised
by the British.!2! In this context N. G. Bartier’s opinion that the British played an important role in
maintaining Sikh identity!?? looks so odd, especially when it contradicts his own observations in defence of
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
British neutrality towards the three Punjab communities. Want of indepth study has led these scholars
completely to overlook the overwhelming evidence relating to the Singh Sabha struggle for their religious
rights, whether it be the Anand Marriage Act (1909), or the right to wear A/rpan, or the control over the
shrines and other institutions. The lack of clear perception has led them to make confusing and contradictory
statements regarding the British motives and policies. The confusion arises mainly because the general policy
of the British, after the Mutiny, was not to disturb the religious norms of the soldiers. So far as the British
policy in the state was concerned, it was obviously directed against the promotion of the Sikh ideological
identity, a far cry from “vigorous promotion” as alleged by McLeod.
The Chief Khalsa Diwan preachers consciously mingled politics with religion in the course of their
speeches. The tone of their speeches clearly reflected their dissatisfaction with the British Government.
Social and economic backwardness of the community was attributed to the loss of political power. The
preachers quite often referred to the days of political ascendancy of the Khalsa and tended to compare their
political subjugation with the bitter experiences of the past under the Mughals. The preachers argued that the
Sikhs suffered under the Mughals because of the tyranny of the rulers. As a corollary, the responsibility for
the then existing state of affairs was attributed to the British. The Government began to suspect the motives
and designs of the Singh Sabha preachers.'23 Many cases were reported to the Government in which Sikh
preachers were found instigating the people against the Government.!*4 In spite of their handicaps, in the
earlier stages, the Singh Sabha parcharaks (preachers), through their emphasis on religion, were able to make a
successful appeal to the Sikh mind and to awaken the Sikh consciousness to its religio-political entity. The
organisation of festivals, prayer-meetings, Nagar Kirtans (religious processions) and Kavi Samelans (Religio-
political recitations) was attempted to escape the notice of the intelligence authorities who normally
prohibited political activities and gatherings. This role of the Singh Sabha preachers in awakening the Sikh
masses from religion to politics is important. A contemporary Government report noted : “The Chief
Khalsa Diwan keeps a staff of paid preachers (Updeshaks) who tramp the country and lecture on various
topics- social, educational, religious, political, and more often than not, all four are inextricably
intermingled.’’!5
Sikh militancy assumed alarming proportions with the Rikabganj Gurdwara affair in 1913.!2 The
Government thoughtlessly acquired some land attached to the Gurdwara, and domolished its outer wall, so
that a road could be built to the nearby Secretariat.!?’ “Bitter agitation arose among the Sikh masses.”!?8 The
Sikhs agitated and threatened to launch a Morcha, but it was abandoned because of the outbreak of the First
World War.!”
It is well-known that the translation of the Sikh scripture, which the British had commissioned the
Christian missionary, Dr Trumpp, to undertake was full of derogatory references to the Sikh Gurus and was
offensive to Sikh sentiments. On the other hand, scholars like J. D. Cunningham, Evans Bell and John
Sullivan had to suffer extreme penalties of dismissal from service for writing honest accounts, but what
Government considered to be pro-Sikh. M. A. Macauliffe, who produced a monumental work on the Sikh
religion in six volumes, also did not find favour with the British, and was not given the benefits and
advantages enjoyed by Dr Trumpp, who wrote against the Sikhs.
REBELLION IN PUNJAB
The failure of the Government to protect the rights of the Sikh immigrants living in Canada and
America, who were the victims of racial discrimination, led to the formation of a revolutionary organisation
known as the Hindustan Ghadr Party. The object of the Ghadar Party was to spread an armed rebellion and free
India from the foreign yoke.!3° War was considered a good opportunity to cause the rebellion, especially
because early British reverses involving large scale casualties of the Sikh soldiers from the rural areas seemed
to the Ghadrites a ripe stage for achieving their objective.!3!
Ghadar Party was virtually a Sikh organisation, and Sohan Singh Bhakna was its President. These
petsons came to Punjab and started their subversive activities both in rural central Punjab and among the
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Sikh soldiery. By the end of 1914, the Ghadrites succeeded in sending one thousand revolutionaries to India
out of the total membership of ten thousand. Some of the Singh Sabhas, were said to be sympathetic to the
Ghadrites. Bhai Takhat Singh entertained the delegates of the Ghadar Party when they visited Ferozepur.
Dalhjit Singh, assistant editor of the Punjabi Bhain, a monthly publication of the Sikh Kanya Maha Vidyala,
Ferozepur, joined the Ghadrites and became a Secretary of Baba Gurdit Singh, leader of the Komagata Maru
affair.'52 “The methods to be employed by the delegates (of the Ghadar Party) in pushing campaign in India
appeared to have been discussed in the weekly meetings of the Singh Sabha at Lahore ...... A member of the
Singh Sabha in advocating these measures spoke of creating a spirit of awakening among Hindus and
Sikhs.”!33 However, the Government succeeded in crushing the rebellion before it could assume bigger
dimensions. Before the appointed date when large scale rebellion in the army or the state could be started,
information leaked out at Lahore. A widespread hunt for the rebels in the state was made and scores were
hanged and sent to transportation for life.
The Ghadrites to their chagrin, discovered that the Congress leaders were more sympathetic to the
British than to the Ghadrite revolutionaries.'3+ Tilak, the so called ‘militant? Congressite, had expressed his
strong disapproval of the activities of the Ghadrites. Gokhale is said to have openly told the Viceroy that he
would like the British to extend their stay in India.'95 There is no denying the fact that the Ghadar Movement
received a set-back on account of lack of support from the Congress leadership, and their persecution evoked
no sympathy from these quarters. This is an important political event which influenced the Sikhs and their
psyche. For Sikh independence Kartar Singh Sarabha is as great a hero as, if not greater than, Bhagat Singh.
In his memory the first statue was raised in Ludhiana, though statues of other heroes, including of Bhagat
Singh, were raised much later.
In this regard three things are extremely significant. The rebellion was by and large a Sikh affair, and
took place mostly in rural Punjab. Nothing of this sort or extent appeared in the rest of the country. Ninety
per cent of the participants and the sufferers were Sikhs. The second point is that two of the noted Sikh
mystics, Baba Wasakha Singh and Bhai Randhir Singh were the participants, who were sentenced to life
imprisonment.
This indicates that in Sikhism there is a basic and inalienable ideological link between religion and
righteous political activity. Third, it is noteworthy that, while the Sikh masses were politically awakened to
sustain a rebellion, persons who later became political leaders of the Congress for Indian independence, were
whole-heartedly cooperating with the British war effort during this period, and the idea of liberation was
beyond their ken, if not foreign to them.
Here it is relevant to quote the confessional statement of Mewa Singh in 1914 who had eliminated
William Hopkinson recruited from India for suppressing a ferment among Canadian Sikhs and whose agent
Bela Singh had murdered two Sikhs in the Gurdwara. Prior to his execution, he stated; “My religion does not
teach me to bear enmity to anybody, no matter what class, creed or order he belongs to, nor had I any enmity
for Hopkinson. I heard that he was suppressing my poor people very much ...... Being a staunch Sikh I could
no longer bear to see the wrong done both to my innocent countrymen and the Dominion of Canada ......
And I, performing the duty of a true Sikh and remembering the name of God, will proceed towards the
scaffled with the same amount of pleasure as the hungry babe does towards its mother. I shall have the rope
around my neck thinking it to be a rosary of God’s name ......”’136
Now, who had taught Mewa Singh an ordinary Sikh coming from a remote Punjab village and
migrating to Canada for earning his living, an essential principle of the Sikh religion, namely, to react against
social injustice. It would be naive to say that Mewa Singh or the Ghadrites were the product of British policy.
What the Singh Sabha did was to revive and invoke the teachings, training and traditions of the Gurus. For,
the history of Sikhism and other whole-life religions clearly demonstrates that it is the blood of the martyrs
that alone can create a healthy and sound moral conditioning of the masses and not any artificial
administrative attempts in pursuance of colonial interests.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
When the war came to an end in 1918, the Sikhs launched a strong agitation under the leadership of
Harchand Singh of Lyallpur and Sardul Singh Caveeshar. They appealed to the Sikhs to volunteer themselves
for the Shaheedee Jatha (band of martyrs) and to join a march to Delhi to re-erect the demolished wall of the
Gurdwara Rakkab Ganj. However, the timely intervention of Maharaja Ripudaman Singh of Nabha saved
the situation from getting worse. The Government acceded to the Sikh demand by restoring the Gurdwara
wall. 137
The tragedy of Budge Budge Ghat came as a bolt from the blue for the Sikhs. A group of Sikh
immigrants returning from Canada became the victims of the British high-handedness. Eighteen men were
killed and another twenty five were injured.'°§ However, Gurdit Singh, their leader, along with twenty eight of
his companions escaped. The rest were rounded up and sent to Punjab, where over two hundred of them
were interned under the Ingress Ordinance. This incident was universally condemned and Sikh public
opinion was greatly mobilised against the British. “Several Sikh papers notably the Khalsa Akhbar (of
Harchand Singh of Lyallpur) and S4er-7-Punjab, both started in 1914, attacked the Government in connection
with the Budge Budge Ghat incident..”!°
Sardul Singh Caveeshar, an important contemporary writes, “The Komagata Maru tragedy at Budge
Budge was another cause of estrangement between the Sikhs and the Government. Through the foolishness
of some police officers, a tragedy was enacted at Budge Budge that threw the whole of India into
consternation ...... The subsequent ruthless punishment of the returned emigrants by Sir Michael O’ Dwyer
did not allow the sores to heal; and the injustice done to India and the Sikhs by the Canadian Government
became a permanent cause of grievance against the British.” 4°
Thus the post-war policy of the British resulting in such like incidents, created both resentment and
anger among the Sikhs in Punjab. Caveeshar observes; “The Sikhs were in this attitude of mind, when they
were thrown in the vortex of Martial Law as a consequence of agitation against the Rowlatt Act.”'4!
The Sikh mind was seriously disturbed. Agitation against the Rowlatt Act started while the Sikh
feelings were already aggrieved at the treatment of the Canadian Government and of the returned immigrants
from there at Budge Bhdge Ghat. This led to violent reaction as reported in the government communique :
“The last communique issued brought the history of events in Lahore and Amritsar, as then known, down to
the afternoon of the 12th of April (1919). The information in the possession of Government was not
complete at the time of its issue. The morning train from Ferozepur on the 12th was held up outside Kasur
Station and looted by a mob of about 1,000; of whom many were armed with lathis. Two Europeans,
honorary Lieutenant Selby of the Ordnance and Sergeant Mostyn, R.A., were killed and another was injured.
After looting the train and doing a great deal of damage in the Station, the crowd burnt the post office and
attacked the Tehsil. Here, however, they were driven off by the police with a loss of one killed and about six
wounded. Some arrests were made. Several stations on the Kasur and Amritsar line were attacked the same
day. Khem Karan station was looted and treasury at Tarn Taran was assaulted unsuccessfully. As the result
of these disturbances it was decided to march a movable column with a gun from Kasur through the Majha
to Amritsar. The column started on the morning of Sunday, the 13th, and arrived at Khem Karan.
“On Sunday, the 13th, the Prevention of Seditious Meetings Act, 1911, was applied to the districts of
Lahore and Amritsar which were declared to be proclaimed areas under the Act. The result of this action is
to make it illegal to hold, without permission, a public meeting for the furtherance or discussion of any
subject likely to cause disturbance or public excitement without permission.”’!42
The events mentioned above clearly explain why, unlike in the rest of the country, the agitation
against the Rowlatt Act took a serious rebellious trend in the central districts of Punjab where the Sikh
population was predominant. This also explains why despite the prohibitory order in the districts of Lahore
and Amritsar, thousands of Sikhs came to Amritsar on the Baisakhi, and later thronged at the Jallianwala
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Bagh in defiance of the local order banning the holding of any meeting in the city. That this defiant agitation
was predominantly a rural Sikh reaction is evident from the fact that out of the total casualties of 1300 more
than sixty per cent were Sikhs, when it is well-known that the Sikh population in the city was just marginal.'3
An important fact which has often been ignored is that in Punjab most agitations have been mass
upsurges and movements, unlike those in the rest of India, where those have generally been either among the
literate classes or in the urban areas. In Punjab since the Ghadar rebellion, the trial and sentences of death
and transportation of life to Ghadrites, following it, and the events preceding and following the Budge Budge
Ghat tragedy, were a chain of occurences that never allowed the enlivened and agitated Sikh spirit to rest in
peace. From the time of the Ghadar rebellion upto the Jallianwala Bagh firing, the Sikh Punjab had remained
in continuous ferment. As against it, the position in the rest of India, had been very different, and one fact
alone indicates the climate, namely, that Mahatma Gandhi had earned during that period two Medals, Kaiser-
i-Hind and Zulu War Medal.'+ As stated already, the Congress leaders like Gokhale, Tilak and Lajpat Rai
were sympathetic to the British and condemned the Ghadrite revolutionaries, whose activities, they openly
disapproved.'* It is difficult to deny that this reaction of Indian political leaders gave support to the British
and caused a setback to the movement of the Ghadrites.
The Ghadr unrest in central rural Punjab leading to the Sikhs’ gathering at Jallianwala Bagh, and the
oppression indulged in by the British administration in the rural Punjab, are primarily and fundamentally a
continuous episode in the Sikh struggle for independence. In fact, it is only incidentally a part of the Indian
political movement which till then was living in a cooperative mood and enjoying the benefits of the Raj.
Much less had it gained any momentum to make any confrontation and suffer large scale oppression.
Another fact which indicates the Sikh character of the agitation is that it was G. A. Wathen, the Principal of
the premier Sikh educational institution in Punjab, who felt so deeply concerned at the inhuman activities of
General Dyer that he ran on a motor-cycle from Amritsar to Lahore and woke up Governor O’Dwyer to
request him not to approve Dyer’s action.'6 It is very relevant and important to understand the complexion
of events in Punjab. The fact is that the pre-Jallianwala Bagh rebellion was a Sikh affair in the Punjab and for
that matter the reaction and the repression perpetrated by Dyer and O’Dwyer were directed against the Sikhs.
K. F. Rustamji writes : “The people of Punjab are a vibrant, vigorous lot ...... Like all brave, warlike races
they are ready for a fight whenever they feel they have been ill-treated or misled. The Punjabis who
participated in satyagraba and violence against the British were so strong in the vanguard that the majority of
the British in India felt at that time that making an example of them at Jallianwala Bagh was unnecessary. The
wisest believed that in the process General Dyer was reckless and overdid it. Few saw it as a setback to
British rule. The British never recovered from the effects of that mistake till the end.”!46-4 That explains
how the rural mind of Udham Singh remained deeply agitated and aggrieved to prompt him to act against
O’Dwyer, the person responsible for the Punjab tragedies of the period. Here it is also significant to state
that the basic inspiration that sustained or inspired Udham Singh to attack O’Dwyer was religious. This is
also evidenced by his letters and his demand for Gw¢ka, the Sikh prayer Book of Gurbani.'*’ It is also relevant
in this connection, that whereas the non-Sikh Indian communities in U.K. disowned him, he was supported
only by the Sikhs of a Gurdwara of West London.'*8
The above narration of facts shows that following the Singh Sabha movement side by side with the
religious awakening, the British measures against political awakening became increasingly open and firm. It is
also clear that the British had always been vigilant in this regard and never failed to suppress, to the extent
possible, the growth of Sikh political consciousness. The important fact is that under the Sikh ideology
religious consicousness, socio-political consciousness and consequent responsibility and reaction go hand in
hand. The net result was that in 1919 the Sikh religious and socio-political consciousness had reached,
because of its tradition and history, a distinctly higher level of commitment and activity than that among the
people in other parts of the country. This is clearly borne out by a contemporary Government Report: “the
Home Rule Agitation and Rowlatt Bills exercised an undesirable effect on the whole Press. The Sikh Press
ventilated petty grievances that the Government was unmindful of the true interests of the Sikhs.”’!*? Thus, it
is this that explains the role of Sikhs in the Ghadr revolution and that of Mewa Singh in Canada. Significant
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
as it is, at that time the Indian political leaders had mostly been cooperating with the British war efforts. This
clearly explains, as we have seen, that when Gandhi after giving up his role of cooperation during the War,
gave the call against the Rowlatt Bills, the response and reaction in Punjab were more significant as compared
with other parts of the country where also the call had been given. For the Sikhs, it was only a continuation
of the socio-political struggle which the Singh Sabha had initiated.
The brutal massacre of Jallianwala Bagh in 1919, in which hundreds of Sikhs were killed and
wounded, added fuel to the fire. After the Singh Sabha Movement had helped the Sikhs to regain their
strength and cohesion, the Sikhs felt that it was time they cleared their gurdwaras from the non-Sikh mahants
and their adverse influence which had the clear backing of the British. So far as the political consciousness is
concerned, it has always been a part of the Sikh ethos, as has been evidenced by the Kwka and the Ghadr
Movements. With the Singh Sabha, as we shall see, it was only a tactical move when they for some decades
remained quiet on the political front. In order to remove the confusion and despondency, which followed
annexation, they wanted first to rebuild their socio-teligious cohesion. Tempers rose very high, when the
Manager and priests of the Darbar Sahib condemned the Komagata Maru and the Ghadrite Sikhs at the Akal
Takhat. Later on, they also presented a robe of honour to Brigadier-General Dyer, who was responsible for
the Jallianwala Bagh massacte.!5°
It was such suicidal policies of the British that Principal Wathen had rushed to stop. As a saying
goes, it is human blunders that sometimes change history. During these days, there spread an unfounded
rumour among the Sikh masses, as well as the Sikhs in the British Indian army, that since the Sikhs were
involved in the Anti-Rowlatt Act agitation and had used the Golden Temple complex as their hide out, the
British authorities had resorted to aerial bombardment of the Golden Temple.'*! This infuriated Sikhs all over
Punjab. To quell this unrest the army took over the administration, and whatever vestiges of a civilised
government had remained, also vanished. The British Government’s actions at Amritsar set the tone of
“Dyerarchy” for the rest of the province, in which the Sikhs were the worst sufferers of the ruthless
repression carried on by the Government. Many Sikh villages were subjected to bombing and machine-
gunning from the air; one of the targets successfully hit was the Khalsa High School at Gujranwala, where
many people were killed and wounded.!* In the seven weeks that the Punjab was administered by martial law,
nearly 1200 were killed, and at least 3600 were wounded.'*> All this brutal repression came as a shock to the
Sikh masses. Winston Churchill made the most scathing criticism of General Dyet’s action. He described it
as “an episode which appeared to be without parallel in the modern history of the British Empire ...... an
extarodinary event, a monstrous event, an event which stood in singular and sinister isolation.”’!+
In this context and the known misuse of the gurdwaras, the Sikhs became acutely conscious that they
could no longer afford to permit their own sacred shrines to become places of corruption, and to be used to
destroy the very roots and the sap that in the past had given them such strength and vigour. Thereafter
started the Gurdwara reform movement and the peacefully organised confrontation with the British. For, the
cover had been lifted, and it had become clear that behind the priests and the mahants stood the strength and
might of the British. Consequently and logically as a second important step, the Sikhs did the greatest
mobilisation against the Government for regaining the control of their gurdwaras from the corrupt puyaris.
The Chief Khalsa Diwan had, no doubt, formed a sub-committee to suggest ways and means to
reform the gurdwaras, but it could not take effective measures owing to the stiff opposition of the mahants
and pujaris who enjoyed the support and protection of the Government. In 1919, the Central Sikh League
was established at Amritsar, with a view to protecting the political interests of the Sikhs.!>> The League passed
a resolution of non-cooperation with the British Government in October, 1919. Its meeting was attended by
Harbans Singh Attari, Baba Kharak Singh and Master Tara Singh. In 1920 the Shiromani Gurdwara
Prabandhak Committee was established and undertook to ‘take over’ all the Shrines including the Darbar
Sahib.'*° The establishment of this committee brought the issues to a wider notice. Thus “a movement which
was religious in origin rapidly acquired a political character.”'5’ The Sikhs now began to realise that a clash
with the Government was inevitable in order to secure justice and to safeguard their interests.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Thus the Singh Sabha movement, after the period of reconstruction, naturally, gave birth to the Akali
movement which was equally motivated by religious as well as political considerations. The following
remarks of V. M. Smith, a contemporary observer, are illuminating in this respect : “Al Sikh traditions,
whether national or religous, are martial. In times of political excitement the militant spirit reasserts iteslf’!>8
It was, therefore, natural that at that stage of history, the Sikhs should come into direct clash with the British
policies which, as we have explained earlier, were hostile to their political and ideological interests.
CONCLUSION
The above narration of events shows that two aspects of the British policy towards the Sikhs have
been clear and consistent, namely : their comparative political suppression as evidenced in the Minto-Morley
(1909) and Montague-Chelmsford Reforms (1919); and the Sikh ideological erosion by a studied patronage of
Hinduised mahants and pujaris, and control of their shrines through Government nominated Managers.
The Ghadr Rebellion under the Presidentship of Sohan Singh Bhakna and the leadership of
religiously oriented Ghadrite Babas and the martyrdoms of Kartar Singh Sarabha and his associates had
politically inflamed the Sikhs in Punjab. Extremely painful was the fact that the Government had managed to
have disowned and declared persons of the religious eminance of Baba Wasakha Singh and Bhai Randhir
Singh of the Ghadr Movement as non-Sikhs by a Sarbrah (custodian appointed by the Government) of the
Golden Temple. Because of the Ghadr Rebellion, suppression of the Sikhs continued to be severe during the
War. These events, however, made it evident that a political struggle with the British with the dual objective
of political freedom and removal of Government control over Sikh gurdwaras, would become inevitable. It
was clear that more than any other area in the country, the Sikhs in Punjab were ready for a confrontation
with the British.
We have already recorded that Sikh religious ethos is both the foundation and the strength of their
urges and aspirations for socio-political liberty. The Sikh shrines, particularly the Darbar Sahib, Amritsar,
continue since the times of the Gurus to be the fount of Sikh power and inspiration.
Under the leadership of the Akalis, the Sikhs came into an open clash with the Government, first for
the liberation of their shrines, and then for the liberation of their motherland. The struggle for the liberation
of their shrines has been given the appellation Third Sikh War. The two Anglo-Sikh Wars had already been
fought in the middle of the last century. In the Third Sikh War the stakes were the freedom of their
gurdwaras and their religion. It was fought on the basis and strength of their religious identity and
institutions. For a Sikh the freedom of his religion and the freedom of his motherland are synonymous. This
is not a recent or a post-facto interpretation of the Sikh religion. We record below the actual understanding
of a contemporary who partook in the Sikh struggle. Sardul Singh Caveeshar writes, “A Sikh wants to fight
his country’s battles from the vantage ground of his religion. Being of a religious trend of mind, he finds
everything subordinate to his Dharma; politics is nothing for him but a promising child of religion. A Sikh
has not yet developed that fine sense of doubtful value that divides life into watertight compartments and
makes of religion in the west something different from one’s social and political life. For the Sikhs, politics
and religion are one. He wants the freedom of his religion, he wants the freedom of his country, but he
knows that he cannot have one without the other. If religion is safe, he is sure to get back, sooner or later,
the freedom of his country. In fact he regards religion as the strong post, from which one should start to get
back the lost liberty, as, in his opinion, the religious spirit alone can keep the freedom of a country safe when
once that has been won.”’!?
Still among scholars who talk of the British promotion of the Khalsa identity, there is a clear lack of
understanding of the Sikh ideology, the realities of the situation, Sikh history and the general historical
perspective. As already explained, the Sikh ideology laid down by Guru Nanak and the Guru Granth involves
a combination of the spiritual and the empirical elements of life. The history of Islam and Judaism that make
a similar ideological combination furnishes very helpful analogies. It is, therefore, sheer misinterpretation,
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
mistrepresentation or misunderstanding of the Sikh ideology to talk of two Sikh identities, namely, the Khalsa
and the Nanakpanthis. Scholars drawn from pacificist or dichotomous religions, involving divorce between
religious and empirical lives and recommending Sanyas, on the one hand, and Varna Ashram Dharma, on the
other hand, not only misunderstand the unity of the Sikh doctrine, but tend sometimes to measure the Sikh
ideology and history by the standards of their own religions. Often such basically conditioned vision is
inclined not to take an objective or over-all view. We have made it very clear how Guru Gobind Singh’s
creation of the Khalsa was the epitome of Guru Nanak’s mission, and how Khalsa and Nanakpanthis were
synonymous terms and were taken and treated as such by the Muslim rulers, their contemporaries or
successors.
It is also important that the first coin struck by Banda Singh Bahadur in 1710 clearly recognises his
victory to be due to the grace of the sword of Guru Nanak. Similarly the coin of Ranjit Singh does not
mention any particular person or king except Guru Nanak as the true Emperor of both the worlds, spiritual
and empirical. Contemporary Mufti-Ali-ud-Din, author of [brat Nama, makes a significant statement, about
Sikh identity of the first half of the nineteenth century, “the Sikhs as belonging to a class highly conscious of
the need of shaking off meaningless rituals that the Brahmins had fostered on the Hindu society ...... They
observed no formalities in the matter of dress and social intercourse also. Ram-Ram and Salam had given
place to Wabeguru ji Ki Fateh. They had also done away with the Brahmanic practice of reading the Vedas, the
Shastras and the Puranas, and recited only Guru’s Bani. The morning prayer consisted of the recitation of the
Japji and the Sukbhmani. They were particularly careful of their personal cleanliness and purity. A regular daily
bath before offering prayers was considered essential, but there wete sometimes deviations, and those who
preferred to wash their mouth, hands and feet alone, were permitted to do so, and the practice was known as
panjishnana. Ardas was an indispensable and prominent feature of their prayers. It was through Ardas that the
Sikhs solicited help from the Almighty for the efficient performance of their daily life and duties.””!
The Sikh identity was founded by Guru Nanak, it was nurtured by the subsequent Gurus. When
mature, the final seal in the form of the awrit ceremony was put on it by the tenth Master. The Sikh Gurus
themselves have been emphasising the unity of the Sikh doctrine. This is evidenced by the use of word
‘Nanak’ in every hymn of the Gurus in Guru Granth Sahib. Thus, ideologically, scripturally, traditionally, and
in the eyes of the community and its opponents, there was only one identity, namely, the followers of the
Gurus. The history of the struggle and persecution in the 18th century, and the way the companions of
Banda got beheaded at Delhi, make for singularity of identity and not for its plurality. Identities are built on
the ideology, motivation, the blood of the martyrs, tradition, suffering and sacrifice, and not by the
juxtaposition of material facts or by verbal argumentation. Therefore, the two components that constitute
Sikh identity, namely, Sikh ideology and the Sikh history during the time of the Gurus and the periods of their
struggle for survival, have to be taken into view and not just ignored. That is why the Singh Sabha leadership
used Gurbani and the Sikh history, especially the armed resistance to the Mughals, as a rallying symbol for the
Sikh revival.
The second factor is the reality of the situation in the post-annexation (1849) period. The Khalsa
army's strength and power had been annihilated. The British in power were extremely conscious of the Sikh
capacity for resurgence, and they sought to ensure in every manner, as indicated earlier, that there was no
political uprising in the State. After the 1857 experience they were doubly conscious and particularly vigilant
to take all measures against any sign of political unrest or uprising. This is clear from the known tyrannical
manner in which the minor Namdhati uprising was suppressed. As we have noted, the British allowed, under
the protection of their wings, free play to the Christian missionaries to attack the identity and ideology of the
Sikh religion, its history and institutions. These missions were located in the heart of Sikh areas like Amritsar
and Batala. The purpose and work of these missions ate well-known. The journalistic work of McLeod, who
has for long years been a functionary of the Batala Christian centre, can be taken to be typically representative
and revealing of the aims and objectives of such Centres. Further, in order to destroy the very roots of
Sikhism, the British gave charge of Sikh Shrines to Hinduised Managers, mahants or pujaris, who did their best
to suppress Sikh practices and tradition, and instead to introduce Hindu ways and customs. For example,
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
whereas Jassa Singh, the head of Sikh leadership, when he struck the coin after his victory of Lahore in 1761,
felt no stigma in calling himself a Kalal, a low Shadra in the Hindu caste hierarchy, the mahants and pujaris
introduced the practice that Magbabi Sikhs would not be given parshad at Darbar Sahib, Amritsar, even though
Mazhabi Sikhs formed a part of Ranjit Singh’s army. In short, had Jassa Singh been alive in the British period,
he would have been debarred from doing any ceremonial service at that shrine.
This was the state of affairs after the annexation, which the leaders of the Singh Sabha had to battle
against. Therefore, they decided, and very wisely, that it would be suicidal to fight on two fronts, namely, the
poltical front and the socio-religious front. Here it is necessary to mention that the first step the Sikhs took,
after they had revived the religious understanding, cohesion and consciousness of the community and
dispelled its sense of shock at the loss of empire, was to free the gurdwaras from the mahants and pujaris. And
it is well-known that the agitation which was only directed against these private priests (wahants and pujaris),
involved the Sikhs in a confrontation with the Government which was really the power behind them and was
interested in their continuance as instruments of erosion of the religious base, the real strength of the
community. Thus, the realities of the situation were such that, if the Sikhs had tried to fight on both the
fronts, failure would have been inevitable. It speaks volumes for their wisdom that they first strengthened
their ideological understanding and foundation. And in this they succeeded to a large extent.
Thirdly, these scholars also ignore the general historical perspective. For example, referring to the
period of Jewish history after A.D. 70, when consequent to the fall of Jerusalem and the total annihilation of
the political elite and the Temple by the Romans, the Rabbis started the intensive work of religious
reconstruction. These religious leaders represented the community both in the religious and the political
spheres. This period of scholars and Rabbis, historian, Cecil Roth, calls the work and time of “The Rule of
the Wisest.’ _Ideologically, Judaism too combines the spiritual life with the empirical life of man. After A.D.
70 it was socio-politically a very lean period of Jewish history. It was a time when “Jerusalem, and the
Temple, lay in ruins, and their rebuilding was forbidden ...... It is true that the people as a whole sat in
mourning for those who had fallen in the War, and for the glory that was gone from Israel ...... The
spokesmen of the Jewish people had hitherto been the rulers of the house of Herod; but the last male
representative of that family, Herod Agrippa I, was estranged from his people, and had not much longer to
live. The High Priest had been hardly less prominent, but with the destruction of the Temple, the High
Priesthood itself had come to an end. But, even, before the fall of Jerusalem, there had been a category
which enjoyed almost equal, if not superior consideration. The Rabbis — the scholars who expounded the
Holy Writ — had always been looked up to by the people with reverence. Now, there was no one else to
revere. It happened that, before Jerusalem fell, one of the outstanding scholars of his generation, Johanan
ben Zakkai, had managed to escape from the city — according to legend, in a coffin borne by his disciples.
Titus had permitted him to settle in the township of Jabneh (Jamina), on the coast near Jaffa, used as a
concentration camp, where he opened a school for the study and exposition of the traditional Jewish lore.
The most eminent of contemporary scholars gathered around him there. The Sanhedrin, formerly the highest
Council of State, became reconstituted from members chosen for their erudition rather than for political
influence or wealth. During the subsequent long period it is this syndrome constituted of scholarly persons
that steered the Jewish people to safety over a period of three and a half centuries. With this scholarly group,
its president or Nasi slowly acquired semi-official status, and in due course came to be recognised as the
representative of the Jewish people in its relation with the Roman authorities. With the fall of the Temple,
the Sadducees, who were the religious heads, and whose existence was bound up with the essential Temple
worship, lost their separate identity or influence. The Pharisee scholars were left masters of the field. These
persons developed the educational system, and became the centres of local life everywhere. These scholars
even went on missions to Rome, discharging duties pertaining to political matters as well. In A.D. 115 the
work of reconstruction was interrupted by a terrible catastrophe. The reason was a political revolt which was
put down with an excess of cruelty and bloodshed. Another insurrection took place in A.D. 182. This too
was mercilessly suppressed, followed by intense religious persecution. A harrow was drawn over the site of
Jerusalem, and a new city erected, under the name Aelia Capitolina, into which no Jew was allowed to set foot
save once a year when they were suffered to ‘buy their tears’ at the Temple site.’”!°!
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
The lessons of this period of Jewish history are too obvious to be ignored, by any perceptive
historian. When a community suffers political defeat, respite for reconstruction is essential; and during this
period the fruitful work has to be a stress on ideology, tradition and the rebuilding of morale and the
personality of the community. It involves fight only on one front, namely the religious, the socio-cultural and
the educational. Emotional or sporadic political revolts during such a lean period are suicidal and become
catastrophic and may put the clock of regeneration back. That is why Roth calls this period of reconstruction
by the scholars, Rabbis and others the “Rule of the Wisest.” No historian dubs these Jewish religious
scholars as stooges or loyalists of the Romans or creation of Roman rulers; nor does any historian ignore
centuries of earlier Jewish history to call the Jewish cohesion and identity revived by these scholars to be the
work done at the instance of the Roman masters.
Like the efforts of the Jewish Rabbis and scholars, the work of Singh Sabha scholars is so strikingly
reconstructive of the life of the Sikh community, that it would be sheer prejudice and distortion to call them
the tools or creation of the British Masters. Any course of revival, political or military, other than the one
taken by Singh Sabhaites, would have been suicidal. Politically and militarily, the British were too strong to be
taken on directly. Just as the catastrophic result of the two Jewish rebellions crushed by the Romans after the
fall of the Temple and Jerusalem, we ate well aware of the dismal fate of the sporadic Kuka uprising and the
unorganised plans of the Sandhawalia group that were speedily destroyed with a heavy hand. The British
power in India then was too well entrenched and alert to be shaken by such flee bites. Considering the work
and achievements of the Singh Sabha and the Akali Movements from 1873 onwards, it is evident that the
Singh Sabhaites and the later Sikh leaders had been politically more wise, alert and conscious than the urban
leaders of the Congress like Gokhale and Tilak. In fact, the Congress leaders, it is well-known, later only
made use of the Sikh struggle, which in its consistency and mass base had taken a clear lead over the
subsequent Congress movement. This is also evident from the fact that the Ghadrites and other heroes of the
struggle whom these leaders had condemned, were later accepted as the martyrs of the Indian freedom
movement. And yet no one dubs the Congress leaders as the creation of the British.
Our statement about the Sikh ideology and the entire narration of events from the annexation of
Punjab to the start of the Third Sikh War, the Gurdwara Reform Movement, makes a number of issues
extremely explicit. The Sikh world view is different from the systems of dichotomous, pacificist, or salvation
religions. The Gurus embodied their thesis in the Guru Granth, and structured the Sikh Panth and its
institutions during a period of over two hundred years. The creation of the Khalsa by the Tenth Master and
its struggle during the eighteenth century are a part of its glorious tradition and its history. We have
recounted that after annexation two historical forces were working with fixed directions and objectives. The
British, as explained, were clear about their political interests and in a studied manner used all means to serve
them. For obvious reasons, one of their aims was to erode the religious base of the Sikhs, which gave them
their power and vigour. They were fully aware of the potential of their erstwhile adversaries, and while they
were keen to divert their energies to other ends, they were equally careful to ensure that the Sikhs were
neither unnecessarily provoked nor allowed to regenerate or develop their socio-political strength.
Our analysis shows that the objectives which the British Government, on the one hand, and the
Singh Sabhaites, on the other hand, continued to pursue were clearly divergent. This made an ultimate clash
between them inevitable. It also explains why the Sikh mass struggle for liberation started much earlier than
such an urge in the rest of the country. But the scholars who assume a community of interests and objectives
between the British and the Sikhs simply fail to suggest, much less explain, why the clash and the Third Sikh
War took place and why it happened in Punjab much earlier than elsewhere.
On the other hand, the Singh Sabhaites knew full well that their only source of inspiration,
regeneration and strength was to draw upon their religion, tradition and history. As it is, the course they were
to traverse, the lines on which they were to work and the institutions which were to be revived, stood clearly
defined and chalked out for them in the Guru Granth and their history. The wisdom of the Singh Sabha
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
leaders lies in their clear understanding of their past and the situation they were to face. While they never
wavered from the ideals and objectives that had been laid down for them, they, according to the needs of the
times, limited their efforts to the task of regeneration and revival of the spirit of the community, without
directing initially its struggle to the political front. We have also seen that having reconstructed and secured
their socio-religious base, slowly the Singh Sabhaites started pursuing their political objectives. It is not an
accident or just a coincidence that the first tangible rebellion against the British which was mass-based took
place in Punjab.
It is significant that it happened in the later part of the Singh Sabha period, and at a time when in the
rest of India there were hardly any signs of any such uprising or even a preparation for it. In fact, the Indian
leaders and the politically conscious elite were openly co-operating with the British war effort in those times.
Equally contrasted was the reaction of the Sikhs in the Punjab to the Rowlatt Act and similar reaction in the
rest of India. The agitation against the Rowlatt Act, culminating in the Jallianwala Bagh massacre and the
subsequent imposition of Martial Law and the Akali struggle for the liberation of their shrines, were the two
off-shoots of the religious base that had been securely revived by the Singh Sabha. It is a part of history that
between 1919 and 1925 no mass based political struggle was conducted outside Punjab.
It is just idle to suggest that any religious identity, or the Sikh religious identity that had been created
by an ideology, new institutions, and a four-hundred year tradition of martyrdoms and unparalleled sacrifices,
could be demolished by the British rulers, as they wished to do, through the mahants, or that such a vigorous
identity could be created by the British, as some writers suggest. Religious ideologies or identites cannot be
created either by wishful thinking or by fiats of the rulers. The fate of Din-i-Ilahi of Akbar, an Indian
Emperor, seeking to change the established tradition and religions is well-known.
Three features of the British Sikh relations are significant. In the annexation of India, the leaderless
Sikh armies had given to the British the hardest resistance. Second, the Sikhs were a people capable of
rebounding after defeat, as they did after Abdali’s blow at Kup. Third, that the entire Sikh strength lay in
their religious base. It is in this context that we have to interpret the two worst massacres of peaceful
agitators during the British period. The first was the killing of hundreds of Sikhs gathered on the Baisakhi
day at Jallianwala Bagh by General Dyer, who felt that he had nipped in the bud another mutiny. The second
was the cold-blooded murder and burning of the entire jatha of 130 peaceful Sikhs who had gone to Nankana
Sahib to hold a gathering there to free the shrine. And it is the British machine guns which under the
direction and guidance of the Punjab Administration threatened to shoot thousands of Sikhs who collected to
lift and cremate the bodies of the dead Sikhs at the Gurdwara. It is no accident or coincidence that in both
these tragedies the victims were predominatly or wholly Sikhs against whom the assaults were directed. Both
these tragedies followed the Singh Sabha Movement; the first as a part of the continuing political activity as
evidenced by the Kuka Movement, Ghadr rebellion and the pre-Jallianwallah risings in rural Punjab. The
second was an overt British intervention when the Sikhs tried to free their Shrines from the Hinduised
mahants. "These two greatest political massacres in Indian colonial history were logical results of the British
policy towards the Sikhs. However, it is correct that knowing full well the potential of a difficult adversary,
the British were careful enough to placate them on minor issues without unnecessarily provoking them into a
bitter opposition. It is indeed strange that a perceptive scholar like Richard Fox, who calls the Akali struggle,
the Third Anglo-Sikh War, is misled into saying that the Sikhs were transmuted into Singhs by the British.
Such a misreading happens, when scholars study a narrow period of events, without viewing them in their
long and true perspective, including the Guru period, when the Sikh society was created, matured and its
targets fixed.
From the foregoing account it should be clear that the attitude of the British Government was far
from patronising or sympathetic. Rather, it was visibly hostile, as should be clear from the following :
1. On the defeat of the leaderless Sikh army the British confiscated the estates of all the Sikh Chiefs
who had fought in the two Anglo-Sikh Wars.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
2. All military grants to the Sikhs Jagirdars were abolished.
3. Hardly a tenth of the old army of Punjab was kept under British pay. Almost 50,000 soldiers
were disbanded.
4, In the words of Dr Petric, a Director of Criminal Intelligence, Government of India: “After
annexation, the Golden Temple and about six other gurdwaras were controlled by the British Government
through a manager directly appointed by the Government.”
5. The gurdwara properties were given over to Nirmalas, Udasis and mahants all of whom had Hindu
leanings.
6. The struggle that the Sikhs had to put up and their immense suffering in regaining control of their
gurdwaras to retain their genuine identity is very well-known.
That the Sikhs came out victorious in the end is due only to their ideology of fighting injustice and
their readiness to lay down their lives to save the sanctity of their gurdwaras and religion.
REFERENCES
Uncalled for assumption which we shall discuss in detail at a later stage.
McLeod, W.H.: The Sikhs : History, Religion and Society (New York, 1989), p. 37.
Fox, G. Richard: Lions of the Punjab : Culture in the Making (New Delhi, 1987), p. 143.
Kapur, Rajiv A.: S7kb Separatism : The Politics of Faith (London, 1986), p. 25.
Barrier, N. Gerald: The Sikhs and Their Literature (Delhi, 1970), Introduction, p. xl.
Fox : op. cit., pp. 140-145.
“One, Se/fexistent, Himself the Creator,
O Nanak! One continueth, another never was and never will be.”
Guru Granth Sahib, Gauri Rag, Trans.
Cunningham, J. D. A History of the Sikhs (Delhi, 1966), p. 330.
8. “Religion consisteth not in mere words; He who looketh on all men as equal is religious.”
Trans. Macauliffe,M. A.: The Sikh Religion, Vol. I (Delhi, 1963), p. 60.
9. “The sense of high and low, and of caste and colour; such are the illusions created in man.’
Guru Granth Sahib, Trans. Gopal Singh : Shri Guru Granth Sahib, Vol. IV (New Delhi, 1987), p.
1188.
10. “The ignorant fools take stones and worship them. O Hindu, how shall the stone which itself
sinketh carry you across.”
Trans. Macauliffe M.A., VoLI, p. 326.
11.“O Brahmin, thou worshippest and propitiatest the Salagram, and deemest it a good act to wear a
necklace of sweet basil. Why irrigate barren land and waste thy life.”
Trans., Macauliffe M.A., Vol. I, p. 61.
12. “Householders and Hermits are equal, whoever calls on the name of the Lord.”
Guru Granth Sahib, Asa Ragni. Trans., Cunningham, p. 334.
13. “In this age few Brahmins are Brahm.” Guru Granth Sahib, ‘Bilawal’, Trans., Cunningham, p. 335.
14. Dhillon, G.S.: Researches in Sikh Religion and History (Chandigarh, 1989), pp. 2-4.
15. Guru Granth Sahib, Bhairo, Trans., Teja Singh, Essays in Sikhism (Lahore, 1944). p. 111.
16. Hagigat-i-Banau-i-Firqa-i-Sikhan (1783 A.D.) quoted in Sher Singh’s article, Guru Tegh Bahadur gave
His Head for Millat-i-nau, in The Sikh Review Vol. 39. 2, No. 446, February, 1991.
BOSON Qo
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
17. Ganda Singh (ed.), Senapat, S77 Gur Sobha (Patiala, 1967), pp. 32-33.
18. Cunningham, J.D.: op. cit., p. 64; Bannerjee, 1.B.: Evolution of the Khalsa, Vol I (Calcutta, 1963),
p.116.
19. Kapur Singh, Parasaraprasna (Amritsar, 1989), (ed.) Piara Singh and Madanjit Kaur, p. 233.
20. Khushwant Singh : A History of the Sikhs, Vol. 1 (New Delhi, 1977), p. 107.
21. Ganda Singh (ed.) : Early European Accounts of The Sikhs (New Delhi, 1974), p. 188.
22. Bhangu, Rattan Singh : Prachin Panth Parkash (ed.) Bhai Vir Singh (Amritsar, 1962), p. 235; Forster,
George; A Journey from Bengal to England, Vol. I (Patiala, 1970) pp. 312-313; Gupta, H.R. :
History of The Sikhs, Vol. I (Delhi, 1978), p. 39.
23. Ibid.
24. Devi Prasad, Pandit : Gwlshan-i-Punjab (Lucknow, 1872), p. 224; Cunningham : op. ait, p. 301.
25. Dhillon, G.S.: op. cit., p. 77.
26. Khushwant Singh : op. cit., Vol. I, p. 137.
27. Khullar, K.K.: Maharaja Ranjit Singh (New Delhi, 1980), p. 185.
28. Government Records, VII-II, p. 328; Punjab Administrative Report, 1851-53, pp. 41-42.
29. Lahore Political Diaries, Vol. UW, p. 260; Secret Consultation, 7 October, 1848, No. 621;
Fauja Singh : ‘Presidential Address’ in Punjab History Conference, Proceedings (Punjabi University,
Patiala, November, 1965), p. 139.
30. Khushwant Singh : op. c., Vol. II, p. 70-71.
31. Foreign Secret Consultation, No. 21, April 28, 1849.
32. Ibid.
33. Yadav, Kripal Chandra : ‘British Policy Towards Sikhs, 1849-57 in Harbans Singh and Barrier, N.
Gerald (ed.) : Essays in Honour of Dr Ganda Singh (Patiala, 1976), p. 189.
34. Ibid.
35. Khushwant Singh; op. cit., Vol. I, p. 88.
36. Hunter, W.W.: The Marquess of Dalhousie (Oxford, 1985), p. 99.
37. Yadav, Kirpal Chandra: op. cit., p. 190.
38. Ibid., p. 191.
39. Ibid.
40. Petrie, D. (Assistant Director, Criminal Intelligence, Government of India) : “Development in
Sikh Politics (1900-1911) (A Report)’ in Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee; gurdwara
Gazette (Amritsar, April 1969), p. 11.
41. Khushwant Singh : op. a, Vol. II, p. 195.
42. Teja Singh : op. cit., p.161.
43. Khushwant Singh : of. cz, Vol. II, p. 94n.
44,Maunier, Rene: The Sociology of Colonies, Vol. 1 (London, 1949), p. 171.
45.Dr W. H. McLeod, a protagonist of some obviously odd and incongruous and superficial
formulations about Sikh history has lived and worked at this centre.
46. Clark, Robert : A Brief Account of Thirty Years of Missonary Work in the Punjab and Sind (Lahore,
1883) pp. 18-19, 66.
47.The most notable of these Missionaries societies were the American Presbyterian Mission, the
Church of England, the Cambridge Mission, the Baptist Mission and the Church of Scotland.
48. Government of India: Census of India, 1921, Vol. I, p. 117.
49. Clark, Robert : op. cit., pp. 44-45; Letters of Queen Victoria 1837-1861, Vol. HI (London, 1908), pp.
68-69.
50. Archer, John Clark: The Szkhs (Princeton, 1946), p. 266.
51. Selections From the Records of the Government of India, Foreign Department, No. VI, General Report on the
Administration of the Punjab Territories, 1852-53, p. 498, in, Yadav, Kirpal Chandra; op. cit., p. 196.
52.In the Central Punjab, there was a dispossessed aristocracy which had “been brow beaten and
rendered inert by a calculated official policy of intimidation and suppression with the beginning
of the British Rule in the Punjab.”
Pauja Singh (ed.) : Héstory of Punjab, Vol. VU, See article by the editor on Kuka Movement.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
53. Khazan Singh : ‘Jangnama Dill’? in Ashok, Shamsher Singh (ed.) Prachin Varan Te Jangname
(Amritsar, 1971), pp. 324-48.
54. Punjab Government Records : Mutiny Reports, Vol. VIII, Part I, p. 237.
55. Khushwant Singh : op. ct., Vol. II, p. 109.
56. Fauja Singh : ‘Presidential Address’, Punjab History Conference, First Session November 12-14,
1965, (Punjabi University, Patiala), pp. 138-139.
57.Rehman, M. A. : Lord Datbousie’s Administration of Conquered and Annexed States (Delhi, 1963), pp.
47-48, 67.
58. Bell, Evans : The Annexation of the Punjab and Raja Daleep Singh, (London, 1882), pp. 82-83.
59. Fauja Singh: “Presidential Address’, op. cit, p. 139.
60. Payne, C.H. : A Short History of The Sikhs (London, n.d.), p. 216.
61. Ellinwood, C.De Witt (Jr.) : An Historical Study of the Punjabi Soldier in World War I, in Harbans
Singh and Barrier; op. cit., p. 348.
62. Barrier, N. Gerald: The Punjab Government and Communal Politics 1870-1908 in The Journal of Asian
Studies, Vol. XXVII, November 3, May 1968, p. 525.
63. Ibid., p. 526.
64. Barrier, N. Gerald : Sikh Emigrants and Their Homeland in Dusenbery, Verne A. and Barrier, N.
Gerald (ed.), The Sikh Diaspora (Delhi, 1989), p. 51.
65. (Lt. General) Goodenough, W. H. and (Lt. Col.) Dalton, J. C : The Army Book For the British
Empire (London, 1893), p. 447.
66. Kerr, J. Ian: Fox and the Lions; The Akali Movement Revisited in O’Connel, T. Joseph, Isral, Milton
et. al. (ed.) : S7kb History and Religion in the Twentieth Century (Toronto, 1988), p. 216.
67. The Khalsa Advocate, December 15, 1904.
68. File No. 942-1922, Home-Political, The Sikh Question in the Punjab, Section 7 (N.A.L.); Ludbiana Gazetteer
1888-89, Chapter IIC, p. 72;
Punjab Legislature Concil Dabates - 8th January to 16th April, 1921, Vol, I, p. 546.
69. Phillauri, Sharda Ram (Pandit): Sikhan De Raj Di Vithya (Jallandhar, 1956), p. 42 (ed.) Pritam
Singh; Gill, Harbans Kaur, Sharda Ram Phillauri (Patiala, 1976), p. 19.
70. Pritam Singh. Ibid., p. 43;
Balbir Singh; Charn Hari Visthar (Amritsar, n.d.). Part I, pp. 63-64.
Gurdwara Gazettee, Amritsar, August 1953, p. 9.
71. Court, Henry: Szkhan De Raj Di Vithiya (Patiala, 1970), p. 8.
72. Ganda Singh : A History of the Khalsa College, Amritsar (Amritsar, 1949), p. 2; The Khalsa Advocate,
Amritsar, September 20, 1903.
73. Bhangu, Rattan Singh : op. @t., pp. 372-75; Latif, Syed Muhammad : Hostory of the Punjab (Calcutta,
1891) p. 213.
Khuswant Singh: op. c., Vol. I, p. 129.
74. Khuswant Singh : Ibid. P. 145.
75. Ibid., p. 127 (n)
76. Ludhiana Gazetteer, 1888-89, Chapter HI-C, p. 72.
77. Report of the Singh Sabha, Patiala, 1880, pp. 5-6.
78. Shri Gurmat Parkash, Rawalpindi, September, 1885.
79. Dhillon, G.S. : Origin and Development of the Singh Sabha Movement; Constituional Aspects’ in Ganda
Singh (ed.) : The Singh Sabha and other Socio-Rehgious Movements in the Punjab 1850-1925; The Panjab
Past and Present, Vol. VII, Part I, April, 1973, Serial No. 13, Punjabi University, Patiala, pp. 50-
SLi
80. Singh Sabha Amritsar; Nayam (Amritsar, 1890), p.1; Report on the Administration of The Punjab
and Its Dependencies For 1897-98 (Lahore, 1898); No. 62, p. ccxix;
Ganda Singh: op. cit., p. 2;
Dhillon,G.S. : Character and Impact of The Singh Sabha Movement on the History of the Punjab (Ph.D.
Thesis, Punjabi University, Patiala, 1973), p. 54.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
81.Sahni, Ruchi Ram: The Gurdwara Reform Movement and the Sikh Awakening (Jallundur, 1922), p.
150.
82. Vihiria, Avtar Singh (Bhai): Sok Pattar (Lahore, 1905), p. 38.
83. Ibid.
84. Khalsa Akhbar, Lahore, April 14th, 1899.
85. Sahni, Ruchi Ram : op. cz, p. 150;
Vihiria, Avtar Singh (Bhai) : Gurdarshan Shastar (Amritsar, 1916), pp. 12-13; Vihiria; Shok Pattar, p.
38.
86. Khalsa Akhbar, Lahore, September 30, 1898.
87. Chief Khalsa Diwan: Seva De Panjah Sal (Amritsar, 1952), p. 2;
Dhillon GSS. : op. cit, p. 58.
88. Khalsa Akhbar, Lahore, September 30, 1898.
89. Report of the Singh Sabha, (Patiala, 1906), pp. 1-5.
90. Gurmukh Singh (Bhat) : My Attempted Ex-Communication From The Sikh Temples and The Khalsa
Community at FaridRot in 1897 (Lahore, 1898), p. 12.
91. Ibid.
92. Ibid.
93. Patrie, D. op. at. in The Panjab Past and Present, Vol. TV Part I (Patiala, October, 1970);
Sahni, Ruchi Ram op. @z., p. 15;
Gurmukh Singh (Bhai) : op. az. pp. 2-3.
94. Ibid.
95. Ibid.
96.Durga Parsad : An English Translation of the Satyarth Parkash (Lahore, 1904), pp. 361-363; Ganda
Singh : ‘The Origins of the Hindu-Sikh Tension in the Punjab’ in The Journal of Indian History, Vol.
XXIV, April 1961, pp. 121-23; The Khalsa Akhbar, Lahore, July 7, 1899;
Lakshman Singh, Bhagat; Autobiography (Calcutta, 1965), p. 58;
Vaid, Mohan Singh (Bhai) : Arya De Dhol Da Pol (Taran Taran, 1915), p. 14.
97. Majumdar, R.C (ed.) :_ Hastory and Culture of the Indian Peopk, Vol. X (Bombay, 1965), p. 103.
98. Smith, R. Bosworth : Life of Lord Lawrence (London, 1883), Vol. I, p. 287.
99. Temple, Richard : India in 1880 (London, 1881), p. 120.
100. Chief Khalsa Diwan : Rules and Regulations of the Chief Khalsa Diwan (Amritsar, 1904), p.1.
101. “I had come to regard the Khalsa College, Amritsar, as Government College minus
Government discipline. No member had a free hand in it, hence it was idle to think of doing
any constructive work without the previous sanction of the Government.” Lakshman Singh,
Bhagat: op. cit, p. 203.
102. Ahluwalia, M. L. (ed.) : Seéct Documents — Gurdwara Reform Movement 1919-1925 (New Delhi,
1985), Introduction, p. xxiii.
103. Khalsa Advocate, Amritsar, (November 14, 1908.)
104. Sunder Singh, Master: K7 Khalsa Kalaj Sikhan Da Hai? (Amritsar, 1909), pp. 30-37.
104-a. Petrie D. : op. cit., in Gurdwara Gazette, p. 45; Isemonger. F.C. and Slattery, J. : Am Account of
the Ghadr Consipracy, 1913-15 (Lahore, 1919), p. 19.
105. Petrie, D.: op. cit., pp. 37-39.
106. Ibid., Dhillon: op. ait, p. 284.
107. Petrie, D. : Ibid., p. 46.
108. Ibid.
109. Ibid., pp. 46-48.
110. Ibid.
111. Talwar, KS. : Early Phases of the Sikh Renaissance and Struggle for Freedom in Panjab Past and Present
(Patiala, October 1970), p. 295.
112. Ibid.
113. Ibid.
114. Ibid.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
115. Barrier N. Gerald: The Sikhs and Their Literature (Delhi, 1970), p. 79.
116. Khalsa Samachar, Amritsar, December 23, 1908.
117. Sahni, Ruchi Ram : op. cit, p. 466; Narang, Gokul Chand : Transformation of Sikhism (Lahore,
1946), p. 321.
118. Government of India, Home Department, Judicial No. 950, June 25, 1914, Simla; Government
of India; Home Department, Judicial No. 1118, July 17, 1914, Simla; Government of India;
Home Department Judicial No. 2248, October, 1914, Simla (N.A.L);
Teja Singh : of. ct. p. 208;
Ganda Singh : Exemption of kirpan from Restrictions under the Arms Act in Panjab Past and Present, Vol.
VII, part I (Punjabi University, Patiala, April 1973), pp. 162-172.
119. Teja Singh: Ibid., p. 209.
120. McLeod, W.H.: The Sikhs: History, Religion and Society (New York, 1989), p. 8.
121. Fox, Richard: op. ct., pp. 208-210.
122. Barrier, N. Gerald : S7kb Emigrants and Their Homeland in Dusenbery, Verne A, and Barrier N.
Gerald (ed).) : The Sikh Diaspora (Delhi, 1989), p. 51.
123. Semonger, F.C. and Slattery, J.: op. cit, pp. 2-4.
124. Talwar, K.S.: op. cit, pp. 293-94.
125. Patrie, D.: op. wit, p. 325.
126. Punjab Administrative Report (1921-22).Vol. I. p. 238.
127. Caveeshar, Sardul Singh : The Akali Movement in Panjab Past and Present, Vol. VU, Part I (Punjabi
University, Patiala, April 1973), p. 120.
128. Ibid.
129. Ibid.
130. Jagjit Singh : Ghadar Party Lehr (Delhi, 1976), pp. 47, 204.
131. Ibid., pp. 51-52.
132. Isemonger, F.C. and Slattery, J.: op. at, pp. 2-3, 37.
133. Ibid.
134. Ibid.
135. Hardinge, Charles : My Indian Years, 1910-16 (London, 1947), p. 115.
136. Khushwant Singh: op. at, Vol. IL. p.179 (28n).
137. Caveeshar, Sardul Singh : of. cit., pp. 120, 137.
138. Government of India : Home-Political-A-November, 1914-Pro. No. 100; Caveeshar : of. ct.,
p. 121.
139. Punjab Administrative Report (1921-22), Vol. I, pp. 238-239.
140. Caveeshar; op. cit., p. 138.
141. Ibid.
142. Ahluwalia: op. cit., p. 87.
143. Puri, Rajinder: Rediscovery of India (New Delhi, 1984), pp. 112-13.
144. Mittal, S.C. : Freedom Movement in Punjab (1905-29) (Delhi, 1977), pp. 82, 143.
145. Puri, Rajinder : op. cit, p. 110.
146. Datta, V.N. : Inaugural Address At the 24th Session of Punjab History Confrence, Punjabi
University, Patiala, 15-17 March, 1991.
146-a. Rustamji, K.F.: Revenge Not the Answer in the Tribune, February 20, 1992.
147. Grewal, J.S. and Puri, H.K. : Udbam Singh Dian Chithian (Avntitsar, 1974), pp. 58, 60-61.
148. Ibid., 66-67.
149. Punjab Administrative Report (1921-22), Vol. I, pp. 238-39.
150. Mohinder Singh : The Akali Movement (Delhi, 1978), p. 14.
151. Ahluwalia, M.L.: op. cit, p. 89.
152. Khushwant Singh: op. a, Vol. UW, pp. 165-66.
153. Ibid.
154. Ibid.
155. Josh, Sohan Singh : Akali Morchian Da Itihas (Delhi, 1972), p. 28.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
156. Mohinder Singh : op. cit, pp. 87-88.
157. Punjab Administrative Report, 1921-22, Vol. I, p. 351.
158. Smith, V.M. : The Akal Dal and Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (1921-22), A
Confidential Memorandum in Panjab Past and Present (Punjabi University, Patiala, October,
1967), Vol. I, part I, p. 279.
159. Caveeshar : op. cit, p. 141.
160. Gurbax Singh : Society in The Punjab Under Ranjit Singh, Mufti-Ali-Ud-Din’s analysis in Panjab
History Conference Proceedings, February 28-29, 1976 (Patiala, 1976), pp. 135-37.
161. Roth, Cecil: Short History of the Jewish People (Glasgow, 1948), pp. 110-112.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
31
FUNDAMENTALISM, MODERNITY AND SIKHISM :
A TERTIUM QUID
NOEL Q. KING
“Fundamentalism” in its strictest technical use refers to a movement within American Protestant
Evangelicalism of fairly recent origin. The word has come to be linked with various literalist, evangelical and
charismatic groups and televangelists. Thence it has been applied to religous extremists who claim to be
returning to fundamentals.! We find the media and some scholars using it of the Pire pinis cargo cultists of
yesterday in Sepik River, New Guinea, onwards to the Babri masjid/Ram janam bhoomi folk in today’s India.
Recently in his Defenders of God, the Fundamentalist Revolt against the Modern Age, Bruce B. Lawrence with
great scholarly care and erudition defines terms and deals mainly with what he considers prime examples-
American-style. Protestant Fundamentalists, the Ithna-ashariya Shia of Iran and such defenders of “The
Jewish collectivity” as Gush Emunim.? He refers the movements back to some of the major concepts of
modern world history as it has developed since World War 1. We will turn back to this shortly.
“Modernity” and “Modernism” refer to a tendency among religions to update themselves by
accepting concepts and techniques from the modern secular world around them. The words are sometimes
used as a kind of second part in a dichotomy “Fundamentalism versus Modernity/Modernism.” They easily
fit into the academic discussion on the “Modernization” of religions like Islam or the influence of modern
America or the Third Republic in France on their own Roman Catholicism early in the century.> But, easily
the concepts elide towards association with Western dominance and the Great Western Transmutation
(abbreviated to GWT) by which the world was transformed between 1492 and 1947.4
Here it is necessary for our purposes to interject that the word “fundamentalist” has been applied to
Sikhism too by both media and scholars especially in the time leading up to and since the tragic Operation
Blue Star. Recent examples include Angela Dietrich’s “The Khalsa Resurrected : Sikh Fundamentalism in
the Punjab.’”’> In this article which struggles to be sympathetic and respectful, the essay on the Sikhs rubs
shoulders with those on Fundamentalist Muslims in West Africa, Iran and Egypt, Secularists in Turky, Sri
Lankan Hindus in Britian, Protestant Tamils in Madras, as well as the American Moral Majority. Again, late
in 1989 at a meeting of the American Academy of Religion at Anaheim in California, a panel discussed these
issues in connection with Sikhism. A paper which has not to date been published and which requests it be
not quoted for it had not been finalized, was read by Professor Harjot Oberoi of Vancouver. It was entitled
“Sikh Fundamentalism : Ways of Turning Things Over ?”
In the discussion generated, it became clear that though a religion which used a Mu/ Mantra and was
given to mulvad obviously got down to fundamentals, the word “Fundamentalist” could hardly be used in the
same way as it was of American Fundamentalists. There was also considerable objection to the way in which
by the use of social science and Marxit historical methods it was to be supposed that Sikhs were mainly
peasants who were led along by a few people who drew them out from the main body of Hinduistic Indians.
The idea was also hotly contested that deep changes in Sikh History from 1699 onwards came in response to
outer stimuli on the part of a body in which it was alleged increasingly Jats had taken over leadership from
Khatris. If we teject such explanations of evolution into modernity and other similarly based arguments and
hypotheses, what better propositions can we put forward to explain the Sikh situation today ? In answering it,
it is necessary to note that modernizing thought since the so-called Enlightenment, a European movement
especially reflected in philosophy of the eighteenth century, has tended to discount any use of hypotheses of
explanations which include the supernatural or that which passes human understanding. Recently some
cracks in this carapace have begun to show.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
It is now possible to tune back and take up our consideration of the position of Fundamentalism,
Modernity and Sikhism against their background in some major trends of thinking about World History.
World History is not a modern western invention. In the eighth century before the Common Era strata of
the Jewish Torah, building on much older West Asian and Egyptian ideas, and the Jewish Scriptures as a
whole give us a schema of how the nations came to be and how they interact and the plan of their history. In
the Puranas, Indic thinkers give us concepts of world ages and world movements. In the eighth/fourteenth
century, Ibn Khaldun gives us in his Muagaddimah a pattern which looks back to the earlier thinking of Arabs
and Jews.
It is impressive how many older Sikhs of my generation read at High School H.G. Wells’ Short
History of the World, which originally came out in 1924. I have also met a good number who had read
Toynbee. Although Karl Jaspers wrote in German, many of his ideas have come to be known to users of
English. Thus a number of us take it almost for granted that there is a kind of intellectual spirit of the age
(Zeitgeist) which seems mysteriously to affect thinkers across the world with the same kind of ideas just as it is
said, new bird songs will spread from bird to bird across an island. Jaspers especially juxtaposes the Athenian
philosophers, the Hebrew prophets, the Upanishadic seers and the Chinese sages in an Axial Age.°
Joseph Needham in his eighty-eighth year remarked that if he had time to carry the implications of
his History of Science and Technology in China into World History, he would very much desire to trace Taoist
ideas and techniques, for instance, with regard to chemistry and the use of gun powder in their influence
upon Muslim scientists such as the alchemists.’ One could follow this up to try to postulate a transmission of
thinking even in a perverted way between the original Chinese invention of gunpowder and the Portuguese
floating fortress. There are many such transmissions which suggest themselves but lack of sound historical
evidence interdicts even their formulation. We turn back to trying to trace some factors in History of
Religion which, if not transmitted, naturally overtake or take place in an ecclesiastical body or corpus at a
certain point in her life.
At Chicago, William McNeill and Marshall Hodgson formulated ideas which have deeply affected
Bruce Lawrence, whose book was mentioned above. In her years of Empire, Muslim civilization was,
according to this hypothesis breathed through and through by a religion which was its conscience and shaper.
But, during the time of “the Great Western Transmutation” of world history, religion was apparently not a
predominant controlling factor or an effective conscience. However, when some thinkers in great cultures
and civilizations, including Western culture, see their societies disintegrating, their young being lost to them,
their best traditions destroyed, they turn desparately to their religions as a means of hope and a way of
working for survival, recovery and resurgence. This is a comparatively late movement which of its own
nature must come after the modernisers have brought the threatening outside influences into their own most
cherished holy of holies. As a movement it too will use the language and methods of the enemy in its attempt
to recover the fundamentals as it imagines them. It too will invent tradition. It too will use science and
technology and be dependent on them and indeed be transformed by them. Broadly and approximately,
Pundamentalism may be considered such a movement or a manifestation of this tendency.
et us turn back to Sikhism. Sikhism was presented to the world by the first Guru, who lived from
1469 to 1539. The tenth occupied the /akht from 1675 to 1708. During those centuries, the Punjab faced yet
more of the Muslim invasions which had gone on since the days of Mahmud of Ghazni, and the Europeans
arrived and began to weave India into their world web. In the nineteenth century they broke in with full
force bringing their world diseases, economics, their philosophical, religious and political ideals and failures.
They brought their ways of education, science and technology. Everywhere the local product seemed to be
swept away. Even their intellectual history with its tale of revolutions in politics, literary critical method,
social and gender structure, its divorce between religion, ethics, philosophy and poltics found local supporters
and exponents and some partial acceptance. But the response in Sikhism was not just one of meeting one
emergency after another, or the evolution of an overall response by any one person nor of a committee nor
of a group of leaders. Rather at base it was the continued unfolding of the enseeded, encoded nature of
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Sikhism as originally propounded by the first Mahala and the other nine. After the tenth, it was vested in the
Book and in the Sangat and the same Spirit held forth the same truths as they applied to that stage of life. Let
us give but one brief example. It was not one person, however brilliant, saying Ham Hindu nain hai \ate in the
nineteenth century, but the First Teacher coming up from the Three Day Waters saying, Hai nain Hindu, Hai
nain Mussulman, which is basic. The nineteenth century remark is but a working out of the early teaching. In
that dichotomy we find posited a third something (the /ertinm quid of our title) : Sikhism.
In the debate about Fundamentalism and Modernity, other buzz words are appearing. These include
“primitivism,” that is, the seeking for a primitive pute state and the attempt to imitate it under present day
conditions. This may be called the restoration ideal or a quest for a return to the primordial, a seeking for a
renewal of a primal vision. At the same time many are talking of ours as a post-modern age. There is
growing suspicion of western ways just as they penetrate more and more places. A colleague brought back
from former East Germany a copy of a poster which shows an attractive young western woman giving a
cigarette in a packet labelled “West” to a Russian official who is choking on his own cigarette. The caption in
Russian says “Try out the West” or more snappily “Test the West.” A caption in German says “This applies
in East Germany too.” On the packet there is a printed warning in English about Life in the West with “its
banal culture and brutal extremes of poverty.”
In their day, thinkers both Eastern, Western and from Africa and the Pacific have done their best.
We test their best, each time the teachings of Sikhism may seem to be fitted into their categories. Then we
find it escaping their fingers and passing on its way. Young Sikh scholars thoroughly grounded in their own
inheritance, who are encouraged and enabled to devote the years of detailed and disciplined study to the age-
long international debate from China to California via the Punjab and Olduvai Gorge will contribute much to
a genuine theory of World History.
REFERENCES
1. For dictionary definitions see for instance any recent edition of Webster’s College Dictionary.
Compare also handbooks like Roger Scruton’s A Dictionary of Political Thought, London : Pan
Books 1982. These works do not really attempt to define so much as to sum up current usage.
However, the article on Fundamentalism in edited Mircea Ehade : Encyclopedia of Religions, Free Press
and MacMillian : New York 1988 volume gives some definitions and bibliography. (This
Encyclopedia is disgracefully inadequate on Sikhism.) The works of James Barr culminating in his
Fundamentalism (London, 1977), though written from a British point of view, have an exactness
of scholarship and originality which make fascinating reading.
2. Published by Harper and Row : San Franciso, 1989.
3. Again for bibliography see in edited Mircea Eliade : Encyclopedia of Religion, Volume 10, the artticles
on Modernism and Modernity.
4. G.W.T. is a term used by Marshall Hodgson whom we mention below which has come into
jargon use in American Universities. Like the Ninja Mutant Turtles of present day fame, it is by
no means purely Western. The British would not have got far in India in any of their enterprises
without widespread and gifted local help and co-operation. The GWT is a world achievement
even as it is a world tragedy.
5. Essay number 6 in a collection edited by lionel Caplan : Studies in Religious Fundamentalism, London
: Macmillan Press, 1987.
6. With Karl Jaspers it is impossible to pick out few titles but ed. Edith Ehrilch, etc. Basic
Philosophical Writings, Selections, Athens : Ohio University Press, 1986 and Man in the Modern Age,
London : Routledge and K.Paul, 1959, give an inkling.
7. The writer had the privilege of two visits with Dr Joseph Needham in July 1988. He made the
remarks quoted in conversation. When I asked after his middle name “Noel”, he said he was
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
born on the first Christmas of the century. Volumes 1 and 2 of his Swence and Civilization in China.
Cambridge (England) : University Press, 1956 and 1958, are the most relevant to our purpose.
8. On William Hardy McNeill see his Readings in World History, New York : Oxford University Press,
1968 and A World History, 1967, subsequently re-edited. On Marshall G.S. Hodgson see The
Venture of Islam : Conscience and History in a World Cwilization, Chicago : University Press, 3
volumes, 1974. Other “display options” as the bibliographical retrieval systems say, include Sir
Herbert Butterfield, Christopher Dawson and a host of others.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
32
MISREPRESENTATION OF SIKH TRADITION IN
WORLD RELIGIOUS TEXTBOOKS
JAMES R. LEWIS
(Genuine) knowledge of another culture is possible (but) the student must feel he or she is
answerable to and in uncoercive contact with the culture and the people being studied. (In the past), most of
what the West knew about the non-Western world it knew in the framework of colonialism; the European
scholar therefore approached his subject from a general position of dominance, and what he said about this
subject was said with little reference to what anyone but other European scholars had said.!
Over the course of the past few decades, academics have invested increasing amounts of energy into
analysing the scholarly discourse of previous eras, particularly the scholarship that was carried out by
colonialist nations with respect to subject peoples. The focus of most of this relatively recent work has been
to point out how the images of non-European peoples presented in such discourse were shaped by the (often
unconscious) presuppositions of European scholars, as well as how this scholarship ultimately fed back into,
and helped to legitimize imperialistic attitudes. Within Sikh studies, a fair amount of analysis along these lines
has been carried out with respect to the semi-scholarly works produced by British officials during the period
of time leading up to the annexation of the Punjab.
As someone professionally involved in teaching of general courses on world religions, I became
interested in examining how non-Western people were presented in contemporary survey treatments of world
religions, especially the representations found in world religion textbooks. What follows is a short report of
my findings in this area with respect to the Sikh community. The focus of the discussion will be on the
misrepresentations of Sikhism that are present in survey treatments of world religions, as well as an analysis
of the factors responsible for such misrepresentations.
The paper has been divided into three major sections. The first section looks at simple errors of fact.
The second and third sections examine two themes that surface over and over again in Western treatments of
Sikhism : Sikh “syncretism,” and the contrast between the supposed “pacificism” of early Sikhism and the
militancy of later Sikhism.? Unlike the first set of errors, which are due largely to carelessness, the second two
misrepresentations ultimately have their roots in the less objective scholarship of the British Raj. Hence, we
will find that, despite the good intentions of present-day scholars, discussions of these latter two themes often
subtly slander the Sikh tradition.
ERRORS OF FACT
If one just glances through a half dozen or so world religion textbooks at random, the first thing that
strikes one about their treatment of Sikhism is the wide diversity in the amount of space devoted to the Sikh
religious tradition. This diversity ranges from whole chapters on the Sikh religion to complete absence in
some texts. More often than not, Guru Nanak is at least mentioned, although usually in the form of a passing
reference to the “impact” of Islam on Hinduism. The incidence of mistrepresentations seems to bear no
relationship either to date of publication or to length of treatment. In other words, contrary to what one
might anticipate, lengthier or more recent treatments of the Sikh religion do not appear to contain fewer
mistakes than shorter or older treatments. For example, in the 1987 edition of Many Peoples, Many Faiths,
Robert Ellwood mistakenly asserts not only that Guru Nanak spent the evsre later part of his life as an
“itinerant poet and minstrel’ but he also remarks that Guru Gobind Singh was “killed in battle.’ Another
curious error is when Ellwood says that the Tenth Master slew a chicken rather than a goat on the occasion
of the formation of the Khalsa.> Hence, proximity in time to the present is no guarantee of accuracy.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
As for more extended recent treatments of Sikhism, in the 1987 edition of Redgions of the World, Lewis
M. Hopfe asserts that Guru Gobind Singh “introduced into Sikhism the worship of the terrible Hindu
goddess of death, Durga.”* Hopfe appears to have fallen into this error by taking an item of historical fact,
the Tenth Guru’s employment of the martial symbolism associated with the Hindu goddess, and
misconstruing it so that (at least in Hopfe’s statement) it appears that the Sikh community as a whole actually
adopted the ritual worship of Durga — a portrayal that is manifestly false. Hence, extended treatment of the
Sikh religion (1.e., devoting an entire chapter to Sikhism) is no more a guarantee of accuracy than a recent
publication date.
Other mistakes that occasionally crop up are the long-refuted position that the First Master was a
“disciple of Kabir,”> and the rather unusual item of misinformation that the Sikh community made an
abortive attempt to form a country of its own during the 1947 partition of India.© One will also occasionally
find statements to the effect that Guru Nanak “accepted the gods of the Hindu pantheon,” without adding
the important qualification that the First Master regarded the deities of Hindu mythology as demi-gods
unworthy of religious devotion.®
It is all too apparent that the source of every one of these misrepresentations is superficial
acquaintance with the Sikh tradition. In the bibliographies of these works, one rarely finds more than one or
two book-length references on Sikhism. While one can sympathize with the difficult position of an author
who takes on the Herculean task of writing a world religious text, and can understand the temptation to
consult as few references as absolutely necessary, there are enough Sikhs in the English speaking world that,
with relatively little expenditure of energy, an author could at kast have sent a draft of his or her chapter on
the Sikh religion to a responsible member of the Sikh community for comment and correction.
Although one might justifiably be irritated with the sloppy scholarship of these various authors, their
mistakes pale in comparison with the lamentable tendency of some academics who are irresponsible enough
to make negative, evaluative remarks about a religious tradition that they have all too obviously neglected to
study with care. Thus, for instance, in 4 Guide to the World’s Religions, David G. Bradley remarks, in language
that seems to heap ridicule on the Sikh community, that the Guru Granth Sahib is “not comprehensive to
most Sikhs; despite that fact, they hold it sacred.’ Similarly, in a multi-authored work, The Reigious World,
Hyla S. Converse asserts that, “with the intention of achieving religious unity, the Sikhs, in their fight for
survival against Islam, became instead a symbol of religious intransigence and hatred.’!© And lastly, in a
statement made by an otherwise reputable contemporary scholar (in the context of an edited work, Redgion
and Man), Robert D. Baird asserts that “Whereas for Nanak, the ultimate matter was devotion to the True
Name, for the present community, self-preservation appears to be somewhat more important.”!! When
contrasted with statements such as these, which constitute errors of judgement as well as errors of fact, the
non-evaluative mistakes of other authors appear more forgivable.
Before leaving this section of the paper, it should be noted that not all surveys of world religions
misrepresent Sikhism. There are, in fact, at least six texts containing a full chapter on the Sikh religion that
appear to be free from misrepresentations. Not by coincidence, all of these general works are multi-authored
volumes, */ an approach which, although, by no means capable of guaranteeing accuracy (as we have already
noted with respect to the books in which Converse’s and Baird’s remarks appear), at least guarantees that the
people composing individual chapters have adequate opportunity to read more than one or two books on
Sikhism. Three of the acceptable treatments that I found were composed by recognized scholars of the Sikh
tradition : Christopher Shackle, W. Owen Cole, and W. H. McLeod.!? (Although Sikhs have often criticized
McLeod’s more specialized studies, they will find nothing objectionable in his chapter in Parrinder’s Man and
His Gods). Hilda Wierum Boulter, who authored the chapter on Sikhism in the comparatively old 1961 Living
Schools of Region, was able to construct an accurate picture by consulting a learned Sikh (Dr Anup Singh)
about his own tradition.!3 Niels C. Nielsen, Jr., who authored the Sikhism chapter in Regions of the World,
appeats to have avoided error by sticking rather closely to the presentation of the Sikh religion found in Cole
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
and Sambhi’s The Sikhs : Their Religious Beliefs and Practices.'\4 And finally, S. Vernon McCasland, who authored
the Sikhism chapter in an older survey of religion that was also entitled Re/gions of the World, managed to
portray the Sikh faith accurately.'5 He seems to have accomplished this by following the sympathetic
treatments of Sikhism found in such works as Max Arthur Macauliffe’s The Sikh Religion.
SYNCRETISM
While it should be self-evident that every emergent religion relies on prior religious traditions as
points of reference for a new vision of spiritual reality, the relationship between early Sikhism and its religious
environment appeats to have captured the attention of observers of the Sikh religion more so than other
religions. In particular, the question of the relative impact of Hinduism and Islam, and more especially the
notion of a “syncretism” of these two traditions, has constituted almost an obsession in Western treatments
of the Sikh religion. One of the most peculiar aspects of this phenomenon is that although the majority of
authors of world religion texts are willing to rely on the syncretism category in their interpretation of the Sikh
religion, there is widespread disagreement as to the precise nature of this blend of Hinduism and Islam. For
example, while some authors confidently portray Sikhism as being more of a “reformed Hindu religion’’,!¢
other authors assert, with apparently equal confidence, that in Sikhism “there is little doubt that the Muslim
source predominates.”!” Similarly, whereas some scholars argue that “Nanak’s doctrine is more a reform of
Hinduism,”!$ one can find other scholars who see no difficulty in asserting that Guru Nanak “leaned rather
more to Islam than to Hinduism.”!® Yet other writers appear to argue for an equal admixture of Islam and
Hinduism.’””° Finally, while some advocates of the syncretism interpretation are willing to go so far as to
assert that the Sikh religion “is not in any absolute sense new’?! (Le., that everything in Sikhism can be traced to
a source in either Hinduism or Islam), other scholars, particularly those who criticize the syncretism
interpretation, have stressed “originality of Guru Nanak.” Thus Hindu/Muslim syncretism, which the
majority of authors of general surveys of world religions seem to accept uncritically as the starting point for
their interpretation of Sikhism, turns out to be far more ambiguous that one might at first assume. This
peculiar state of affairs should lead the careful observer to ask broader sorts of questions about the
syncretism interpretation, such as, why has so much scholarly energy been invested in this particular question
? And, what, ultimately, does it mean for one religion to be a “syncretism” and another not ?
The answers to this line of questioning are complex because there is more than one factor at work
here. The widespread influence of the syncretism interpretation is partially attributable to the writings of
certain Sikhs who advocate the idea in order to portray Sikhism as an inherently ecumenical religion. Another
factor contributing to the pre-eminence of the idea in surveys of world religions is the tendency of authors to
over-emphasize Sikhism’s syncretic character “due to the attractiveness of a syncretistic religion in a textbook
on the great world teligions.”’8 There is, however, an often unrecognized problem with the label
“syncretism,” which is that the term was traditionally utilized to denounce groups that had deviated from the
dominant religion, and who were consequently portrayed as having polluted the true faith by “grafting on
foreign elements.”?4 From this perspective, it is reasonable to hypothesize that the syncretism appellation
probably originated with English missionaries or some other group of colonial officials who regarded the Sikh
religion as spurious.
If someone were to argue that “syncretism” has lost its negative, judgemental connotations, we can
ask, why, then, are the major religions of the West never described as “syncretisms” ? In other words, there
is basically nothing wrong with the observation that both Muslim and Hindu influences are evident in the
Sikh religion, as long as one does not fail to note that the same state of affairs exists in other religious
traditions. Christianity, for example, was shaped by Judaism, Mithraism, Neoplatonis, and other Hellenistic
religions. And, not just during the period of their birth, but also over the course of later contact with other
peoples, all of the major world traditions have been influenced, to some extent, by other religions. Why,
then, is it appropriate to refer to Sikhism as a “syncretism,” but not appropriate to thus refer to other
religions ? In other words, if a faith like Christianity cannot appropriately be called a “syncretism,” then what
term would apply to Christianity’s particular blend of influences that could not apply to Sikhism ?
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
With a little reflection, it should be apparent that there is no clear criterion for distinguishing Sikhism
from other religious traditions on this point. The covert judgement, and here we are finally in a position to
state the evaluation implicit in this seemingly neutral term, is that Sikhism can be understood entirely in terms
of its constituent religions, whereas other traditions are somehow “more,” or that they somehow “transcend,”
the religions from which their constituents are derived. To restate this value-judgement as bluntly as possible,
the founders of other traditions were somehow able to provide a special (creative ? revealed ? ) element to
their new spiritual synthesis that was somehow missing in the case of Guru Nanak.
I am, of course, exaggerating the point, but it needs to be made perfectly clear that the
characterization of the Sikh tradition as a “syncretism” is a holdover from the days when all of the other
world religions were compared with Christianity for the purpose of demonstrating Christianity’s superiority.
Although I recognize that present-day scholars do not consciously intend to pronounce such a judgement
against Sikhism, the fact that “syncretism” continues to be used differentially — to describe some religions
but not others — indicates that this judgement has not ceased to shape interpretations of the Sikh tradition.
PACIFICISM / MILITANCY
Next to Hindu/Muslim syncretism, the most frequent misinterpretation of the Sikh religion to
appear in world religion textbooks is the contrast between the supposed “pacificism” of Guru Nanak and the
militancy of Guru Gobind Singh. Although a few authors of general surveys have recognized that the
difference between the First Master and the Tenth Master on this point lay more in the circumstances of the
time during which they lived rather than in their basic orientations (the First Nanak’s attitude was no more
“passive” than the Tenth Nanak’s was “violent” — both forcefully preached the truth and asserted the rights
of the oppressed), more often than not such authors have seen it fit to exaggerate the contrast until it appears
that there is an actual contradiction between early and later Sikhism. To cite just a few such
mistrepresentations :
Another element in the religion of Nanak was his pacificism. This man, in all his travels and with all the rejection
that he recewed, maintained the stance of a pacificist. He never struck out at his enemies, and apparently he taught his disciples
to follow this pattern. In contrast to the teachings of Nanak, Sikhs, in their later history, became known as the most militant of
warniors.”?
Although the teachings of Nanak himself set forth a quietistic religion that laid stress upon the individual and his
relationship to God, the religion, which developed after Nanak, became highly political, leading to a religious state in the Punjab.
Also, the original emphasis on individual virtues and piety became in time a faith that emphasized strength, combativeness, and
even militarism.°6
Guru Gobind Singh built up Sikh fighting strength, and what had begun as a group of behevers in brotherly love
turned into a formidable military brotherhood which waged war against Muslims, and which believed, as Muslims did, that death
in battle was a passport to paradise.*”
These negative judgements constitute only the most recent manifestations of a biased interpretation
of Sikhism that was first articulated by some of the British scholar-administrators of the Nineteenth Century.
W. L. McGregor, for example, in a book originally published in 1846, observed that, “Nanak, as the founder
of the Sikhs, is greatly venerated by that nation, though they appear to have entirely forgotten his tenets of
peace.”8 In a more sharply worded statement, H. H. Wilson, in an article first published in 1848, asserted
that,
(Guru Gobind Singh) changed the whole character of the community, and converted the Sikhs of Nanak, the disciples
of a religion of spirituality and benevolence, and professors of a faith of peace and goodwill, into an armed confederacy, a military
republic. The worship of “steel” was combined with that of the “book”, and instead of attempting to unite Mubammadans and
Hindus into one family fraternity, he made his disciples vow implacable hatred to the followers of Mohammed.??
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Although we might be inclined to be somewhat forgiving toward these Nineteenth Century figures,
who were, after all, writing around the period of the Anglo-Sikh wars as well as engaged in the difficult task of
legitimating British imperialism, we have to wonder what issue is at stake behind the very similar statements
of contemporary scholars. Rather than tackle this problem directly, let us ask the same type of question
about the early pacificism/later militancy contrast that we asked about Hindu/Muslim syncretism — the
question of differential treatment. In the case at hand, the proper way to pose the question is; Are there other
religious traditions in which the founder preached (or at least appeared to preach) a pacificist message that
later followers disregarded ?
Of the established world religions, Jainism has been the most faithful to its founder’s pacificism,
whereas Buddhism’s historical record is somewhat uneven. However, indisputably the religion with the worst
history of violence — a violence totally at odds with the teachings of its founder — is Christianity. Hence,
while all of the above citations are more or less inaccurate evaluations of Sikhism, in many instances a little
substitution of terms would transform them into highly accurate evaluations of Christianity. For example, if
one substitutes relevant Christian terms for a few of the corresponding terms in McGregor’s statement cited
earlier, one obtains an entirely appropriate description of the Christian tradition :
Jesus, as the founder of Christianity, is greatly venerated by the members of that religion, though they
appear to have entirely forgotten his tenets of peace.
One could do much the same with the passages cited earlier from contemporary world religion
textbooks.
Considering the applicability of such statements to the Christian tradition, one might be surprised to
learn that the same authors who are willing to pronounce judgement on Sikhism fail to voice similar criticisms
of Christianity. Given the peculiarity of this state of affairs, it would not be inappropriate to postulate some
kind of unconscious repression-projection mechanism at work that might explain these scholars’ lack of even-
handedness. One does not have to be a psychoanalyst to perceive that guilt about the gap between one’s
ideals and one’s behaviour can be pushed out of the light of full awareness only to re-emerge as a projection.
In lieu of a better explanation of the one-sided treatment of the Sikh religion by Westerners, it appears to the
present writer that the relevant scholars ate uncomfortable with the contradiction between theory and
practice in their own religious tradition, but have repressed the problem and have projected the contradiction
onto Sikhism, a tradition that apparently (but not actually) contains the same contradiction. Thus, their
condemnation of Sikh militancy is really a projection of their own (unexpressed, repressed) condemnation of
the Christian tradition. The point here is not to criticize Christianity, but rather to once again point out the
differential treatment that the Sikh religion has received at the hands of Western scholars; these kinds of
evaluative statements would have been less objectionable had similar criticism been levelled against other
religious traditions as well.
CONCLUSION
To bring this discussion to a close, I should like to remark that I found it highly distressing that a
telative amateur in the field of Sikh studies such as myself could uncover so many errors of fact and
judgement in the academic productions of religion scholars — the great majority of whom are my
countrymen. While many of the misrepresentations I have indicated result from sloppy scholarship, in these
writers’ defense we should take into account that the Sikh religion is one of the most understudied traditions
in the American Academy. If one glances at the structure of the American Academy of Religion, for instance,
one finds program units devoted to such tiny traditions as alive American Religions, Baha’i and
Zorasttianism, but no unit focusing on the relatively larger Sikh tradition.°° The poverty of American
scholarship on Sikhism is a self-perpetuating situation that prevents an American school of Sikh studies from
emerging. For example, to speak from personal experience early in my graduate work, I was discouraged
from focusing on the Sikh tradition because, it was said, such a speciality would limit my employment
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
prospects. As a consequence, I set aside my original interest for a different speciality and have only
sporadically been able to put my energies into Sikhism.
I know that I have painted an extremely dismal picture of the state of Sikh Studies in the American
Religion Academy, but there are indications that this situation could change. Americans as a group, and
consequently the American Academy, have become increasingly interested in the Sikh community, although
unfortunately, the primary cause of this new interest in Sikhism is the series of tragic events that have taken
place in the Punjab during the eighties. It was in the same way that Islam became an important area of study
in the wake of upheavals in Islamic countries. We can anticipate the emergence (though on a smaller scale) of
Sikhism as a recognized area of study.
REFERENCES
Edward W. Said: Covering Islam (New York : Pantheon, 1981), p. 155.
. Much of the basic analysis in the latter two sections repeat the analysis found in certain parts of
my earlier paper, “Some Unexamined Assumptions in Western Studies of Sikhism” Journal of Sikh
Studies 13: 2 (August 1985), although many of the examples in the present paper are new. In the
section on the pacificism-militancy contrast, one will also find a few continuities with my
“Images of Sikhism in the Writings of Early Orientalists” Studies in Sikhism and Comparative
Religion 6 : 2 (October 1987).
3. Robert St. Ellwood, Jr. : Many Peoples, Many Faiths (Englewood Clffs, New Jersey : Prentice-Hall,
1987, 3rd ed.), p. 93, p. 102, and pp. 101-102.
4. Lewis M.Hopfe: Religions of the World (New York : Macmillan, 1987, 4th ed.), p. 184.
5. Ward J. Fellows: Refgions East and West (New York : Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1979), p. 82.
6. “The Sikhs rose in arms to claim a state of their own, and the Muslims and Hindus retaliated.”
Geoffrey Parrinder : The Faiths of Mankind (New York : Thomas Y. Crowell, 1965), p. 60.
7. Kenneth W. Morgan, (ed.) : The Redigion of the Hindus (New York : Ronald Press, 1953), p. 41.
8. “Nanak says in the Japji that the Hindu gods and goddesses, including Shiva, Brahma, and Devi,
adore the True One,” S. Vernon McCasland : Refgion of the World (New York : Random House,
1969), p. 506.
9. David G. Bradley : A Guide to the World’s Religions (Englewood Cliefs, New Jersey : Prentice-Hall,
1963), p. 128.
10. Kyle M. Yates, Jr., (ed.) : The Refigious World : Communities of Faith (New York : Macmillan, 1988,
2nd ed.), p. 98.
11.W. Richard Comstock, (ed.) : Redgion and Man : An Introduction (New York : Harper & Row,
1971), p. 217.
12. These works are, respectively, Stewart Sutherland et al., (ed.) : The World’s Rekgions (Boston, Mass.
: Mass G.K. Hall, 1988), Peter Bishop & Michael Darton, (eds.) : The Encyclopaedia of World
Faiths (New York : Facts on File, 1988), and Geoffrey Parrinder, (ed.) : Man and His Gods
(London : Hamlyn, 1971).
13. Vergilius Ferm: Living Schools of Religion (Paterson, New Jersey : Littlefied, Adams & Co., 1961).
14. Neils C. Nielsen, Jr., (ed.) : Redgions of the World (New York : St. Martin’s, 1983).
15.McCasland : op. cit.
16. Wing-tsit Chan, Ismal’il Ragi al Faruqui, Joseph M. Kitagawa, and P.T. Raju: The Great Asian
Religions : An Anthology (New York : Macmillan, 1969), p. 5.
17.Johan A. Hutchison: Paths of Faith (New York : McGraw-Hill, 1969), p. 200.
18. Bradley : op. cit., p. 127.
19. Ninian Smart: The Refigious Experience of Mankind (New York : Charles Scribner’s Sons. 1976), _ p.
150.
20.E.g. Denise Lardner Carmody & John Carmody : The Story of World Religions (Mountain View,
California : Mayfield, 1988), p. 253; Mithrapuram K. Alexander: World Religions (Dubuque, lowa
Nr
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
:Wm. C. Brown. 1968), p. 78; and Hans-Joachim Schoeps : The Religions of Mankind (Garden
City, New York : Anchor, 1968), p. 167.
21.John B. Noss & David S. Noss: Man’s Refigions (New York : Macmillan, 1984, 7th ed.), p. 221.
22. McLeod in Parrinder’s : op. cit, p. 212.
23.Mark Juergensmeyer : The Forgotten Tradition : Sikhism in the Study of World Religions, in Mark
Juergensmeyer & N. Gerald Barrier, (eds.) : Sikb Studies (Berkeley, Graduate Theological Union,
1979), p. 15.
24. Paul B. Courtright : Syncretism and the Formation of the Sikh Tradition, in Harbans Singh & N, Gerald
Barrier, (eds.) : Panjab Past and Present : Essays in Honour of Dr Ganda Singh (Patiala : Punjabi
University, 1976), p. 417.
25. Hopfe : of. ct. p. 183.
26. Herbert Stroup : Founders of Living Religions (Philadelphia : Westminster , 1974), p. 104.
27. Richard Cavendish : The Great Religions (New York : Arco, 1980), p. 49.
28.W.L. McGregor : The History of the Sikhs (Patiala : Languages Dept., Punjabi Univ., 1970; orig.
pub. 1946), p. 41.
29.H.H. Wilson : Civil and Religious Institutions of the Sikhs, 12 M. Macauliffe et. al. : The Sikh Religion :
A\ Symposium (Calcutta : Sushil Gupta, 1958), p. 58. Originally published in the Journal of the Royal
Asiatic Society (1848).
30. A small group of interested scholars recently attempted to form a new program unit of the Sikh
tradition. This proposal was rejected. (Letter from James E. Wiggins, Executive Director of the
AAR, to James R. Lewis, December 13, 1988, author’s files.)
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
33
MISREPRESENTATION OF SIKHISM IN
WESTERN ENCYCLOPAEDIAS
KHARAK SINGH
I. INTRODUCTION
1.1. The purpose of this paper is to draw the attention of the Sikh public in general, and scholars in
particular, to the treatment of Sikhism in encyclopaedias and books on comparative religion published in the
West since the beginning of the present century. There is a wide diversity in the amount of space devoted to
the Sikh religion, varying from whole chapters to complete absence in some texts. Treatment of Sikhism as
an independent religious system is rare. Frequently, Sikhs are described as a sect of Hindus and Sikhism
mentioned in a passing reference, as an impact of Islam on Hinduism. As compared with other major
religions of the world, like Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, etc., the space provided for Sikhism should
be considered insignificant.
1.2 Factual errors are common. For example, many publications show Guru Nanak as a disciple of
Kabir. Guru Nanak’s mention of some Hindu gods and goddesses has been given as his acceptance of these
deities, although he has repeatedly asserted that they are not worthy of religious devotion. One author has
made the frivolous suggestion that Guru Hargobind (the Sixth Guru) was an employee of Emperor Jehangir.
In some texts, worship of the Hindu goddess Durga has been attributed to Guru Gobind Singh, although
there is overwhelming evidence that he was an uncompromising monotheist, and that he recognized no other
deity except the Akal Purakh or the Timeless Lord.
1.3. Other features are misinterpretation of Guru Nanak’s system as a syncretism of elements
borrowed from Islam and Hinduism, and the alleged ‘pacificism’ of Guru Nanak and ‘militancy’ of Guru
Gobind Singh, questioning the unity of thought of the ten Gurus. Such views are obviously based on a very
superficial study of Sikhism.
1.4 The authors of entries on Sikhism were invariably non-Sikhs. It is hard to believe that no Sikh
scholars were available for this purpose. The publishers could at least show the entries to some followers of
the Sikh faith, who could point out the obvious mistakes. Guru Nanak is the only Prophet whose original
writings are available. In his numerous compositions, he has explained his religious philosophy and world-
view unambiguously, leaving little scope for misinterpretation. The obvious handicap of the Western non-
Sikh scholars was that they did not have the time or patience to study the original literature, a large part of
which had not yet been translated into English or some other Western language. In a few cases, their views
also appear to be visibly influenced by their own chauvinism and bias in favour of their own faith, which
makes it difficult for them to see merit in another faith.
1.5 Misrepresentations started appearing as early as the beginning of the present century in the
encyclopaedias. These were, by and large, ignored and it was hoped that in subsequent publications the
entries would be entrusted to more knowledgeable scholars. The hope has unfortunately not materialised,
and errors continue to be repeated even in recent publications of the eighties. Sikhs are no more confined to
a few districts in the Punjab. A Sikh with a beard and turban is now a common sight almost anywhere in the
world. People are curious to know about their faith and culture. The information available in the
encyclopaedias is highly misleading, and this affects their image. An exercise has, therefore, been undertaken
to examine the version of Sikhism in major publications. It is proposed to take up the matter with the
Publishers with a view to helping them present a correct picture of the Sikh religion, its founder and its
followers. This paper is a part of that exercise, covering relevant extracts from selected texts, with suitable
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
comments. This might, as it should, stimulate interest of scholars in this almost completely neglected area,
for the benefit of Sikhs in particular, and the world community in general.
II. ENCYCLOPAEDIA OF RELIGION AND ETHICS, VOL. IX & XI
Ed. James Hastings: T. & T Clark, 38 George St. New York: Charles Scribers Sons, 153-157, Fifth Av.
2.1. This is the oldest among the encyclopaedias examined, and was published as early as 1917.
There are two entries, one on Nanak by J.W. Youngson (pages 181 to 184 of Vol. IX), and the other on
‘Sikhs’ by H.A. Rose (page 507 to 511 of Vol. XI). The authors draw heavily on Ernest Trumpp, who is
known more for his hostility towards Sikhism than his contribution as a scholar. Another source, M.A.
Macauliffe is also mentioned, but is used selectively only where it endorses the biased opinion of Trumpp.
For example, while following Trumpp, the Janamsakhis, as a soutce of historical information about the life of
Guru Nanak, are summarily rejected as ‘rubbish’, the following remarks of Macauliffe are also quoted as
implicit support of the conclusion : “We must premise that several of the details of this and of all the current
Janamsakhis appeat to us to be simply settings for the verses and sayings of Guru Nanak. His followers and
admirers found dainty word pictures in his compositions. They considered under what circumstances they
could have been produced, and thus devised the framework of a biography in which to exhibit them to the
populace.”
2.2 Referring to the compositions of the bhagats included in the Adi Granth, the note records :
“It shows to what extent Nanak was indebted to his predecessors in the Indian field of thought
within those limits of time, and how much their influence tended to bring about the remarkable reformation
that took place. The Reformation had begun before his day. Nanak was fourteen years older than Luther,
and died eight years before him, and when that great reformer took his stand for truth at the Diet of Worms,
Nanak was in his humble way seeking to guide the Indian people to the recognition of a personal God. The
Indian reformation was salvation from atheism, and we may see in Nanak the highest and the best it
reached.”
2.3 The implication of the above is that Guru Nanak merely carried forward a reformation that had
been set in motion by earlier bhagats, and that its scope was limited to salvation from atheism as compared
with the much broader and higher Reformation of Luther. Unfortunately, the author has failed to see, much
less understand, the full content of Guru Nanak’s message and the revolution brought about by the religion
revealed through him, as discussed in this paper.
2.4 But, it does not appear to be the intention of the author to give accurate information about
Guru Nanak and the Sikh religion. He appears to be more keen to prove the superiority of his own faith. He
writes :
“He (Nanak) fearlessly attacked idolatry, and, if he did not rise to a high degree of spiritual
enlightenment, we can only say that Christian truth had not been conveyed to him.”
And again,
“Although it is the fashion among the Sikhs to regard all their Gurus as true Guru (sat gur), yet, when
pressed, they tell us that the true guru is God, and the true guru of the Granth Sahib is not Nanak, but is the
supreme, the gur-dev, the incarnation of God, the sinless one, and it cannot fail to strike the least observant
reader of the Granth that the only religion that can satisfy the aspirations of the Sikhs, and disclose the
identity of the sat gur and that claims to do so, is the Christian. Whether Nanak was acquainted with the
Christian truth is a debated question, but, whether he was or not, we must allow that, being in some degree
conversant with the Mohammadan faith, he may have known something of the revelation of God in His
Word, the true teacher, God-incarnate, the Lord Jesus Christ.”
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
2.5 Such remarks about a Prophet of the stature of Guru Nanak, based on ignorance as they are,
and the arrogance of the above claims, are certainly not in good academic taste, and are in fact un-Christian.
The suggestion that Guru Nanak did not realise the Christian truth, whatever that means, is meaningless. The
logic behind the conclusion as to who is true guru, is also difficult to accept.
2.6 There are a couple of other errors in the section relating to Sikhs, contributed by Young. On
page 508, Gurditta is described as having entered the Udasi order. Gurditta was a householder. In fact, he
was a soldier, married twice and had children. Also, his death was a sequel to a hunting accident. These two
facts hardly conform to the cult of the Udasi sect.
2.7 On the same page, the author records of Guru Tegh Bahadur as saying that, “he was unworthy
of wearing his father’s sword, he proclaimed his ambition to be styled Degh Bahadur, or ‘Lord of the Vessel’,
the degh which symbolises the world.” One would like to see any reliable historical evidence in its support.
For, “‘Tegh Bahadur’ was the title or name given to him much earlier by his great father Guru Hargobind,
when he displayed extraordinary skill in wielding the sword in an encounter with the Mughal forces.
2.8 Describing the awrit ceremony, it is stated that “a Sikh who is regualr in observing Sikh rules of
conduct, stirs with a dagger some sugar in water in an iron basin, while chanting verses from the Granth.” As
a matter of fact, five Sikhs are required to perform the ceremony. No single Sikh can prepare or administer
amrit to himself or any one else.
II. MODERN RELIGIOUS MOVEMENTS IN INDIA
JN. Farquhar: The Macmillan Company, New York, 1918, pages 338-343.
3.1 This commentary is important for the purpose of this paper, since it is among the earliest ones
recotded in the beginning of this century, and it causes some basic mis-statements about Sikhs and their faith,
which have persisted in most of the subsequent publications. The very first paragraph is as follows :
“Nanak (1469-1538), the founder of the Sikh Sect, was a disciple of the famous teacher Kabir.
Except in two matters, his system is practically identical with that of many Vaishnava sects. It is theism, and
the main teaching of the founder is highly spiritual in character. Yet, the whole Hindu pantheon is retained.
The doctrine of transmigration and Karma and the Indian social system remain unaltered.” Let us examine
the above statement briefly in the following paragraph :
3.2. Was Guru Nanak a Disciple of Kabir ? : The answer is an emphatic No. And no disrespect is
meant to the great Saint who is held in highest esteem by all Sikhs. Here we are trying to ascertain a historical
fact. As it is, Kabir and Guru Nanak were not contemporaries. There is no historical evidence to suggest
that they ever met each other, much less that they had a teacher-disciple relationship. Kabir was a resident of
Benares, while Guru Nanak lived at Talwandi (now Nankana Sahib) and Sultanpur Lodhi in the Punjab, until
he set out on his divine mission around 1500 A.D. Guru Nanak did visit Benares during his sojourn to the
East. Kabir had died earlier. None of the reliable Janamsakhis mention a meeting between the Guru and
Kabir. During the time of Guru Arjun Dev, approximately 60 years after the death of Guru Nanak, Bhai
Gurdas wrote a var giving a brief biographical account of Guru Nanak. Later, Bhai Mani Singh wrote a
biography of the Guru at the behest of Sikhs who felt concerned over the interpolations in Janamsakhis by
interested parties. Neither of these two writings mention any meeting between Kabir and Guru Nanak. In
the Guru’s own writings, we do not find any reference to a dialogue with Kabir, nor has Kabir or any of his
successors ever made such a claim.
3.3. A fundamental difference between Kabir’s system and that of Guru Nanak is in their attitude
towards women and pacificism (ahimsa). Religions like Islam, Judaism and Sikhism accept total social
responsibility and reject celibacy and ahimsa. Kabir, however, was a misogynist, and accepted ahimsa. This is
exactly contrary to the fundamentals of Guru Nanak, who recommends a householder’s life and equality of
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
man and woman. He also accepts total social participation and responsibility, and clearly rejects ahimsa. ‘True,
they are both monotheists, but their over-all world-views are clearly at variance. Evidently, a person rejecting
abimsa could never be a disciple of Kabir.
3.4 The question that remains to be answered is that in spite of overwhelming evidence to the
contrary, how did this view as to Guru Nanak being a disciple of Kabir gain currency ? Fortunately, apart
from the warnings of Bhai Gurdas and Bhai Mani Singh against distortion of the life history of Guru Nanak,
the question has been examined in detail by M.A. Macauliffe.! Acccording to him, “There were three great
schisms of the Sikh religion which led to the falsification of old, or of the composition of new Janamsakhis.
The schismatics were known as the Udasis, the Minas and the Handalis. The first schism of the Sikhs began
immediately after the demise of Guru Nanak. Some of his followers adopted Sri Chand, his elder son, as his
successor, and repudiated the nomination of Guru Angad.” ......... “The second schismatical body of the Sikhs
were the Minas. Ram Dass, the fourth guru, had three sons, Prithi Chand, Mahadev and Arjun. Prithi Chand
proved unfilial and disobedient, Mahadev became a religious enthusiast, while Arjun, the youngest, followed
in the steps of his father. To Arjun, therefore, he bequeathed the Guruship. Prithi Chand is stigmatised as
Mina or deceitful, a name given to a robber tribe of Rajputana. Prithi Chand, however, succeeded in
obtaining a following, whom he warned against association with the Sikhs of Guru Arjun.” ......... “The
Handalis, the third schismatic sect of the Sikhs, were the followers of Handal, a Jat of Manjha, who had been
converted to the Sikh religion by Guru Amar Das, the third Sikh Guru. Bidhi Chand, a descendant of
Handal, was a Sikh priest at Jandiala, in the Amritsar district. He took unto himself a Muhammadan woman,
whom he attached to him rather by ties of love than of law, and upon this he was abandoned by his
followers.”
3.5 “He then devised a religion of his own, and compiled a Granth and a Janamsakhi to correspond.
In both, he sought to exalt to the rank of chief apostle his father, Handal, and degrade Guru Nanak, the
legitimate Sikh Guru. For this purpose, creative fancy was largely employed.”
The motive behind this is clear, viz., degrading Guru Nanak. The suggestion that Guru Nanak was a
disciple of Kabir, is a part of the same conspiracy.
3.6 Kabir is, and will continue to be held in very high esteem in the Sikh world. The Gurus
respected Kabir’s teachings, and common areas in their preachings are by no means inconsiderable. That is
why Guru Arjun incorporated selected compositions of Kabir in the Adi Granth. Here it is necessary to add
that not all his works form a part of Guru Granth Sahib. Only such compositions as conform to the system
of Guru Nanak’s thought, have been included.
3.7 With regard to the Hindu pantheon, which, in the author’s view, is retained by Guru Nanak, it
must be understood that the deities of Hindu mythology are mentioned in the Guru’s compositions only to
say that they are not worthy of religious devotion.
3.8 Was Guru Nanak’s System Identical with Vaishnavism 2: Nery often Guru Nanak’s system is
confused not only with the system of Vaishnavas, but also with that of Kabir and other bhagats. Under the
superficial identity, however, there is a divergence of a far-reaching consequence, which is frequently missed.
The subject has been examined in detail by Daljeet Singh.? In the limited space available here, the best thing
will be to quote his conclusion :
“Our discussion reveals that the so-called devotional systems may be divided into three clear-cut
categories. To the first category belong Vaisnavism and Nathism where devotion is purely formal and
confined mainly to image worship or Yogic, meditational and ascetic practices. The value of ritualism is
recognized. In the social field, the caste system forms the sanctified spiritual basis of man’s social and moral
ethics and duties; or the world is renounced and a monastic life of asceticism and celibacy is taken up ......
The second devotional system is of men like Plotinus, Sufis, Christian mystics and Saints like Kabir, Ravidas
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
and Namdev. The history of this devotional system in India and outside shows that saints of this group,
while they accept the principle of human equality, resort primarily to a system of faith and meditation for
spiritual attainments. They, as stated by Niharranjan Ray, work just as individuals, purely for their own
salvation or personal religious and spiritual aims and aspirations. Their love or devotion is directed towards
God with the goal of union with Him as an end in itself. Here, in the words of Ray, ‘there is absolute
surrender as much to the personal God as to the established social order.’ In this category, man’s love of
God does not move in the field of social concern, responsibility or involvement. The methodology adopted
is of meditation and interiority. In the third group, to use the inimitable words of Bergson, man’s love of
God is transformed into ‘God’s love for all men’, Here, the sole religious path, both for the seeker and the
superman, is through deeds prompted by the love of man and God’s attributive Will. Just as Vaishnavism
falls into the first category, Sikhism belongs to the third category.”
3.9 In Vaishnavism, like other earlier Indian traditions, the world is considered a misery or
suffering, or mithya, and for liberation, sanyasa, asceticism, celibacy and yogic practices enjoy high spiritual
value. The religious or spiritual aims and aspirations are personal, with little or no concern for society or the
established social order. “In Sikhism (according to Guru Nanak), the world is real. In fact, it is the abode of
the True Lord, and birth as a human being is a great privilege, since it gives one the great opportunity of not
only knowing the truth, but also the more glorious privilege of living it; of not only understanding the
Creative Will, but also of carrying it out. For, God works not through miracles, but through man whose
resources and capacity are enormous. Therefore, in Sikhism the ideal is not only to know the truth, but to
live truth. Realisation of truth is not an end in itself, but only a means to the highest end of creative living,
the latter alone being the correct test and index of the former. In fact, such an effort is not optional but
obligatory, it being the sole measure of spirituality.”>
3.10 The cults of Vaishnavism and Bhakti are much older than Sikhism. Guru Nanak came on the
scene much later. A look at the history would indicate that while the Saints and the Vaishanavites carefully
avoided involvement in the socio-political field, Guru Nanak, his successors and followers were repeatedly
involved in defence of righteousness and confrontation with the forces of oppression and injustice. The
Fifth and the Ninth Guru made supreme sacrifices for this cause. The last personal guru (Guru Gobind
Singh) sacrificed his all including his four sons, and inspired the entire community of his followers to leap
into the struggle which lasted for several decades, and effectively ended the regular tide of invasions from the
north-west, that had plagued India for over a thousand years. This contrast in the historical record is not
merely incidental. “It represents the compulsive consequences of the ideologies and objectives of the
different religious systems.’”4
3.11. This should be enough to show that Guru Nanak’s system was not identical with that of the
Vaishnava sect or Kabir.
3.12 Indian Social System : The author says that the Indian social system remains unaltered in Guru
Nanak’s system. As everyone knows, the Indian social system was and still is based on caste system. There
ate four main castes and hundreds of sub-castes in the social hierarchy. The lowest ones are Sudras who are
untouchable. Even their shadow is enough to cause pollution, and they have no other rights except to
perform menial jobs that the higher castes will not look at. Women also are given a lower status. Guru
Nanak’s crusade against the caste system is well-known. There are numerous verses in which he decries
discrimination between man and man on the basis of caste. Examples are :
“T consider all men high and I acknowledge none as low.
One God hath fashioned all the vessels,
One Light pervades the whole creation.”>
“Appreciate the Light, do not ask for caste.
There is no caste hereafter.’
“Vain chatter is the boast of caste
Vain chatter is the boast of fame.’
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
“Caste can gain nothing,
Truth within will be tested.”
“Of no avail is the caste by birth, ......
A man’s caste or faith is determined
by the works he performs.’”?
“at is said) The dharma of Jogis is to acquire gnosis,
The dharma of Brahmins is what is ordained in the Vedas.
The dharma of Kshatriyas is the dharma of the brave,
And the dharma of Sudras 1s to serve others.
But, a universal dharma should be one for all.
Nanak is a slave to one who understands this secret.
For, he is the image of the God impeccable.” !®
“There are the lowly among the low castes,
And there are the lowliest among them.
Nanak stands by their side.
Why should he look to the higher castes ?
Where the lowly are cared for,
It is there that the Grace of the Lord is showered.”!
3.13. The other major area of inequality in the Indian society was the status of woman. Even in
higher castes under certain circumstances, women were treated like Sudras. Woman was considered deceitful,
a temptress, and a hindrance to spiritual progress. Guru Nanak’s was the first great voice raised in favour of
equality of sexes. Towards the end of a long stanza written to plead the cause of equality for women, he
demands :
“How can you call her inferior, who gives birth to kings P”’!
3.14 Guru Nanak attacked social vices like su#ee (burning of widows), female infanticide and slavery.
He opened the door of religious, social and material development to all human beings irrespective of caste,
creed, sex or social status. He practised every word of what he preached. He chose for his companion a low
caste Muslim (Mardana). During his travels, he preferred to stay with low caste people over the high castes.
At Kartarpur, where he settled eventually, he started a community kitchen where everybody ate together.
Everybody worked and was required to do all kinds of duties. His successors continued and even intensified
the reforms. Guru Amar Das never granted audience to anybody who was reluctant to eat from the common
kitchen. He assigned responsible positions to women in the missionary set-up organised by him. Guru
Gobind Singh completely abolished the caste system among his devotees by making them drink awrit from a
common bow] at the awrit ceremony. He declared that everybody joining the order was his son.
3.15 It should be abundantly clear from the above that in Guru Nanak’s system, the Indian social
order received his attention and he materially altered it. In fact, what the Guru and his successors achieved,
amounts to a complete revolution. The point has been more completely elaborated by Jagjit Singh in his
book The Sikh Revolution.
3.16 Other Comments : Comments ate necessary also on a few other points in the author’s note.
Some of these are :
(a) On pages 335-336 he writes :
“This volume is called the Adi Granth or “Original Book.’ The Tenth Guru added a great deal of
fresh material; and the result is the Granth Sahib, or Noble Book of the Sikhs.” The correct position is that
Guru Gobind Singh did not add any of his compositions to the Adi Granth. The hymns of his father, Guru
Tegh Bahadur, were, however, incorporated in the volume compiled by the Fifth Guru. His own
compositions, were collected much later. The Guruship was conferred only on the Adi Granth, which alone
embodies the Canon.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
(b) At the bottom of page 336 is the following remark :
“The Khalsa became strong to resist the Mughals, but their organisation cut them off from their
fellow-countrymen, and made them practically a new caste.” The Khalsa can never become a caste, since it is
a voluntary order open to everybody. The caste, on the other hand, is determined by birth. The Khalsa was
highly respected by the common man because of the sacrifices made by them for the cause of the dharma,
righteousness and the poor people. In fact, Khalsa provided an ideal, and ordinary people, particularly among
the Sikhs, aspired to become its members.
IV. HINDU WORLD : AN ENCYCLOPAEDIC SURVEY OF HINDUISM, VOL.II.
Benjamin Walker: George Allen C Unwin Ltd,
Ruskin House, Museum Street, London, 1968.
4.1. The more important among the points in the section relating to Sikhs in this publication which
need comments are briefly reproduced below :
4.2 Sikhs have been described as a “sect of reformist Hindus founded by Nanak ...... who was
greatly influenced by the reformer Kabir ...... who owes much to Kabir” (pp. 396 and 398). On page 121 it is
stated :
“Early in life he (Guru Nanak) came under the influence of the great religious reformer Kabir to
whom he was indebted for some of his later doctrines.”
The question of Sikhism as an independent religious system has been discussed in detail earlier, and
needs no repetition. The mere fact that the Guru was born of Hindu parents and that the majority of his
initial followers were of Hindu origin, does not make his religious system a part of Hinduism. Similarly, the
position of Guru Nanak v7s-a-vis Kabir has been explained in an earlier section. The existence of some
common areas in the religious beliefs of the two, does not make one indebted to or a disciple of the other.
4.3, Guru Tegh Bahadur: The author records on page 396 :
“Tt is said that during his imprisonment, he (Guru Tegh Bahadur) was charged with looking in the
direction of the Emperor’s harem, to which the Guru replied, ‘Emperor, I was not gazing at your queens’
apartments. I was looking in the direction of the Europeans who are coming from beyond the western seas
to tear down your purdah and destroy your empire.”
The story is ridiculous and highly improbable, since it assumes (a) that the prison was located in the
vicinity of Aurangzeb’s harem, (b) that his prisoners awaiting death sentence were free to move out and gaze
at the Queens’ apartments, and (c) that Guru Tegh Bahadur who gave his life for human rights and religious
freedom of his own people, could think of replacing the Mughals with Europeans as rulers. The story was
obviously planted by an interested party of the East India Company to justify and perpetuate its foreign rule
over India. A parallel is found in the story invented during the Mughal rule that when Babur met Guru
Nanak, the latter blessed him with the Indian Empire for seven generations. It is needless to say that this and
such stories are baseless.
4.4. Guru Gobind Singh : the book acknowledges that “Guru Gobind Singh knew Sanskrit, Persian
and Arabic, wrote inspiring poetry of great literary excellence in Punjabi and was also the author of what is
known as the Dasam Granth” (p. 396).
4.5 It may be added that his works written in Punjabi, available to us, are limited. Bulk of his
compositions are in Braj Bhasha, and their literary excellence is also unquestionable. However, the Dasam
Granth in the extant form(s) was not compiled by the Guru. In fact, the collection appeared decades after his
demise, with large sections attributed to anonymous authors. Apart from this, the author has made some
remarks about the Guru, which are damaging and without basis, for example,
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
“He is said to have introduced into Sikhism the worship of the terrible goddess, Durga.”
“There is no doubt that the violent philosophy he preached was far removed from the gentle
philosophy of pacificism of Guru Nanak. Gandhi referred to him as ‘a misguided patriot’.”’”. Bhai Vir Singh,
the great Sikh scholar, published a book Dewi Pujan Partal'* in Punjabi, in which he has examined the alleged
worship of the goddess Durga by Guru Gobind Singh. He has concluded that the story is a pure fabrication.
The Guru was at Paonta Sahib during the period when the Hom to please the goddess is alleged to have been
performed. In all his known authentic works, the Guru praises only One Supreme Lord, the Akal Purakh.
He accepts no other deity including gods, goddesses or even the avtars. The same injunction was issued to the
Khalsa at the time of awrit and this has been handed down by tradition to the present-day. He taught his
disciples not to depend upon gods or goddesses, but be self-reliant. They must wage the fight against evil
forces themselves taking the sword in hand and lay down their lives in the battlefield, if necessary. If still the
story of the worship of the goddess has persisted, it is because it has been planted in a most subtle manner by
Brahmins, the challenge to whose authority started with Guru Nanak and reached a climax, when Guru
Gobind Singh opened the doors of the Khalsa Order to one and all who believed in One Akal Purakh and
were prepared to fight for the cause of dharma or righteousness.
4.6 The alleged discrepancy between the philosophies of Guru Gobind Singh and Guru Nanak
results from a superficial look and a lack of understanding of Guru Nanak's thesis. In fact, it does not exist.
Guru Nanak never preached a philosophy of pacificism. Realising that the root-cause of people’s misery was
spiritual degeneration, he emphasized the need for their spiritual uplift. But, he did not neglect the worldly
aspect of life. He exhorted the people to uphold their honour and self-respect and fight the tyrant. He says :
“Should one’s honour be violated, while living,
He does not deserve the food he eats.’”!5
Again
“To what avail are worship without honour,
Sanyas without truth, and the sacred thread
Devoid of moral restraint ?’’!6
He founded a society that would face aggression like heroes. His challenge was :
“If you want to play the game of love,
come to my path, holding your head on your palm.”!”
Again, he calls God ‘Destroyer of the evil’, ‘Annihilator of the devilish’,
and
“Tf God wills, He brandishes the sword
to cut the head of the enemy.”’!8
4.7 When Babur invaded India and his troops plundered cities and temples and murdered countless
innocent men, women and children, Guru Nanak could not remain silent and content with his rosary. His
famous composition Babur Vani'? expresses his deep anguish over the atrocities committed by the ‘Horde of
Sin’, as he calls the army of Babur. He not only condemned the aggressor, he also took to task the local
rulers for their unpreparedness and failure to protect their subjects. “If a powerful lion attacks a herd of
cattle, the master is squarely responsible,” he said. He shared the intensity of his feelings with God thus : “O
Lord, did you not experience any pain over the suffering of such magnitude >?” In the light of the above
views, who would say that Guru Nanak preached a philosophy of pacificism ?P
4.8 The fifth Guru, Guru Arun Dev, affirms Guru Nanak’s philosophy. In the same vein this
apostle of peace says :
“First accept death, forget the desire to live,
and then with humility come to me.””°
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Guru Gobind Singh’s philosophy was no different. He declares, “When all other means fail, it is
justified to take the sword in hand in the cause of righteousness.”?! Thus, when Guru Gobind Singh launched
the Khalsa Order, he simply carried out something that was envisaged in Guru Nanak’s plans. In the words
of Dr Gokal Chand Narang, ‘the steel required for the sword of Guru Gobind Singh was provided by Guru
Nanak.’ The complete unity, consistency and continuity of the message of all the Ten Gurus, including
Guru Nanak Dev and Guru Gobind Singh, are expresed in the Guru Granth Sahib : “Ika bani Ik Gur Iko
sabad veechar.’> (Trans. : The Revelation is one, the Guru is one, the interpretion or contemplation of the
Word is also the same.)
4.9 Reference to Guru Gobind Singh as a ‘misguided patriot’ could only result from a lack of study
of the Guru’s life and philosophy and from ignorance of political, social and religious conditions of his times.
In Bachittar Natak, the Guru has stated the purpose of his birth very clearly. It was to propagate dharma,
protection of the saints and to end oppression and tyranny, both political and religious. He had come to
guide humanity out of superstition, political subjugation and misery. His was a divine mission. Who could
misguide him ? He had studied the history of previous centuries during which all non-violent means had
been tried without success. He realised what should be obvious to any impartial student of Indian history
that adherence to ahimsa in all situations had done incalculable harm to the society, and was responsible for its
misery. He reached the most carefully considered conclusion that “for a righteous cause, when all other
means fail, it is justified to take to arms.”’4 That is what he did. He inspired the people to fight for their
honour and freedom. He organised them and trained them. He taught them to make sacrifices for a noble
cause and to overcome the fear of death with his personal example. The humble people, who had been
treated worse than animals, saw in him their saviour, and responded to his call. Under his guidance and
inspiration, the people shed the fear of the mighty Mughal Empire, and after a prolonged struggle succeeded
in bringing about its downfall and establishing their own government. It was due to Guru Gobind Singh that
freedom dawned in the country after centuries of slavery. How could Guru Gobind Singh be called an
innovator, when five out of the Ten Gurus maintained an army and wielded the sword, and when the Fifth of
them had created a ‘state within a state’; and, apart from organising the wherewithal for militarisation, had left
instructions for his young son, Guru Hargobind, to raise an army. The subsequent gurus, including Guru
Gobind Singh, only continued the tradition.
4.10 For Mahatma Gandhi, ahimsa or non-violence was a creed and a cure for all ills. Let us take
one incident out of Indian history reported by the official reporter of Mahmud Ghaznavi, who invaded India
several times during the eleventh century. He records that when Mahmud’s troops were plundering the
famous Hindu Temple of Somnath and breaking the images of the deities, people from the neighbouring 300
villages collected and sat chanting mantras. Not one of them resisted or raised a little finger to stop the
soldiers from desecrating the Temple. Probably they had received the traditional pacificist ‘guidance’ from
some mahatma. Anybody who would fight or ask others to fight, would be dubbed as ‘misguided.’ Abimsa or
pacificism has its votaries, but the Sikh Gurus are not among them. It is both self-righteous and narrow for
Toynbee to measure Prophet Mohammad by the pacificist standards of his own religion and criticise him
severely. It is equally myopic for pacificist Gandhi to see Guru Gohind Singh through the lens of his own
prejudices, especially when it is well-known that he gave up pacificism, when it suited his interests. In
Sikhism, the ideal is a saint-soldier, sant-sipahi or gurmukh, and not a pacificist recluse who is considered
escapist.
4.11 Ranjit Singh: It has been stated that when Maharaja Ranjit Singh died, four of his wives and
seven slave women were burnt with him in accordance with the Hindu practice of sustee. While this may be a
historical fact, it needs to be pointed out that the practice was strongly condemned by the Gurus. The Sikh
religion does not approve of it. The Maharaja had died. He cannot be held responsible for the act of suttee.
The fact is that it were his Hindu wives, who did the su#tee according to their own beliefs.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
4.12 Guru Granth Sahib: The remarks regarding Guru Granth Sahib include the following :
“The Granth does not quite escape polytheism, as it practically assumes the Hindu pantheon, and it
accepts the doctrine of Aarma and transmigration.”
“In the course of time the Granth suffered many doctrinal modifications and has yielded much to
Hinduism. The teachings of Guru Gobind Singh were again of a different character, being militant, in
accordance with the needs of the age in which he lived.”
The above observations show complete ignorance of Guru Granth Sahib and Sikh history. No
doubt, the Sikhs accept the doctrine of karma and transmigration. However, Sikhs believe strictly in One
God, and Guru Granth Sahib clearly rejects polytheism. Guru Granth Sahib starts with the Mu/ Mantra
beginning with [& Onkar, which means that there is only One God who is immanent. According to the Sikh
Gurus, God is a Being to be approached and loved as a fond and faithful wife loves her spouse. Guru Nanak
calls Him Nérankar, that is, without form. Bhai Gurdas spoke of Him as formless, without equal, wonderful
and not perceptible by the senses. At the same time, all the Gurus believed that He is immanent in His
creation. In fact, the Guru emphasizes that “God is One, brother, He is One Alone.’’5
4.13 There has not been even the slightest change, doctrinal or otherwise, in the text of Guru
Granth Sahib. In fact, any attempt to make a change would be regarded as heresy. The authenticity of the
present Brr of Guru Granth Sahib was earlier established by Bhai Jodh Singh? and has been confirmed by
Daljeet Singh.?” The bani of Guru Gobind Singh was never incorporated in the Adi Granth, which alone is
the scripture and Guru or Sole Guide. So, the question of modifications on this account does not arise. With
regard to militancy of Guru Gobind Singh, it has been shown earlier that this was no innovation of the Guru.
Pour earlier Gurus had maintained an army and Guru Nanak had himself rejected ahimsa as a creed.
4.14 Other Remarks: Some of the other remarks in this entry that deserve attention, are reproduced
below :
“Critics have frequently pointed out that while Sikhism ostensibly dropped many features of
Hinduism, it has itself adopted similar features in a disguised form.”
“Nanak is regarded as an incarnation of God. It is believed that Nanak performed miracles ...... The
other Gurus are regarded as incarnations of Nanak, assuming his divinity upon their formal installation.”
“Sikhism set its face against ceremonial and meaningless repetition of the name of God, although
Sikhs now lay great emphasis on the Name.”
4.15 Sikhs do not believe in the theory of avtarhood or incarnation. Guru Nanak declared in the Mu/
Mantra that God is Ajuni, i.e, He never takes birth. The so-called avtars or prophets are His creation.
“Cursed be the tongue that says ‘God incarnates”’,?8 records Guru Granth Sahib. Guru Nanak never claimed
that he was God incarnate, nor did any of his successors do so. They considered themselves His servants.
Guru Gobind Singh warns :
“He who calls me God, shall fall into the fire pit of hell. I am the servant of the Supreme Lord,
come to see the wonderful dharma of this world.”
After having initiated the five piaras, he, in all humility, requested them to initiate him. No
knowledgeable Sikh has ever claimed that the Gurus were incarnations of God. They are given profound
reverence for the Lord’s Word delivered through them.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
4.16 Neither Guru Nanak nor any other Guru ever claimed any miracles, and there is no mention of
these in the Adi Granth. Bhai Gurdas has quoted Guru Nanak as saying, “Apart from the Word of the Lord
and the holy congregation, there is no other miracle.’’*0 The stories invented by some ignorant or interested
people should not be confused with the spirit of Sikhism or the Gurus’ teachings.
4.17 The doctrine of Naam in Sikhism is not mere repetition of a name. In fact, Guru Granth Sahib
clearly says, “Everyone repeats God’s name. But such repetition is not the way to God.”3! “With guile in the
heart he practises guile, but mutters God’s name. He is pounding husk, and is in darkness and pain.”32 “One
mutters God’s name, but practises evil daily. In this way the heart is not purified.”*? Naam is realisation of the
immanence of God in everything, and expresses itself as love and service of humanity, following the
examples of the Gurus themselves. For, Guru Granth Sahib says that it is by “one’s deeds that man is
assessed in His Court’, and “by our deeds alone we are near or away from God.”
V. ASIAN RELIGIONS
Geoffery Parrinder; Sheldon Press, London (1977)
5.1 The author has made the following observations :
“Nanak did not intend at first to found a sect, but disciples were attracted by his teaching. The word
Sikh means ‘disciple.’ He declared, “There is no Hindu and no Muslim.’ This bold utterance and his songs
attracted considerable attention. He passed his life partly in teaching and partly in retirement.
“As a poet, Nanak differs from Kabir, but as a social and religious reformer, he did much to bring
Hindus and Muslims together. He strongly opposed formalism in worship, and inculcated devotion to one
God.”
“Persecution under the Mughals caused the Sikhs to take up arms, and henceforth, they have
regarded themselves as a military brotherhood, more akin to missionary Islam, usually distasteful to Hindus.
Distinctive features were adopted for Sikhs which have remained as their badge: the hair must not be cut, a
steel comb, a bangle must be worn, together with shorts and a sword.”
5.2 There is one factual error in the above statements. A ‘steel’ comb is mentioned in the five
distinctive features for Sikhs. While a comb is one of the five K’s, it need not be of steel. More often and
almost aways the comb worn by Sikhs is wooden. It is believed that the combs adopted by the five piaras,
when they were initiated by Guru Gobind Singh, were wooden. There could, however, be no objection
against a steel comb either.
5.3. The Other Mistaken Suggestion Is: “Persecution under the Mughals caused the Sikhs to take up
arms.” There is no doubt that the Sikhs resisted persecution. But it was not merely a reaction to
circumstance. It was in accordance with the doctrines laid down by the founder of the Sikh faith, Guru
Nanak, who had enjoined upon his followers to resist oppression and injustice not only on themselves, but
even on others who were weak and poor. The Guru protested strongly against tyranny of the invaders and
oppression of the local rulers. The Guru preached a whole-life philosophy that involved defence of self and
society and full development of the individual and the society, socially, spiritually and economically. His
successor, Guru Angad did not neglect any of these aspects. He took concrete steps to develop the physical
fitness and fighting qualities of his disciples. There is a gurdwara at Khadur Sahib, called Mal Akhara
(literally, Wrestler’s Ring) at the spot where he used personally to supervise wrestling and other physical
fitness activities of his disciples. Diet in the /amgar or the common kitchen received personal attention of the
Guru’s wife, Mata Khivi. This was continued during the Third and the Fourth Gurus’ period. The Fifth
Guru, Arjun Dev, gave special military training to his son, Hargobind, who became the Sixth Guru after the
martyrdom of his father in Mughal captivity. Guru Hargobind formally donned two swords, one, the insignia
of miri (empirical life), and the other of p77 (spiritual life). Following instructions of his father, he organised a
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
regular army, and actually fought and won several battles with the local Mughal chiefs or rulers. The two
swords meant that the mri aspect, which had always been there, became more visible than it had been earlier,
because of the increased numerical strength and better organisation of the Sikhs. The two swords also
demonstrated that the p77 aspect was equally important and that it was not neglected or discarded, as some
critics would have us believe. In Sikhism, the strength for physical resistance to evil or oppression and
injustice derives from spiritual development. So, emphasis on the spiritual aspect continued undiminished.
There was no doctrinal change involved in wearing two swords by Guru Hargobind. It is very important to
understand that in Sikhism, the insignia for p71 is also a sword, and not a rosary, showing the basic
combination of the spiritual with the empirical in Guru Nanak’s system.
5.4 Another statement that needs to be contradicted is that “He (Guru Nanak) passed his life partly
in teaching and partly in retirement.” This indirectly suggests that the Guru became a recluse and gave up
interest in life and the world. This is absolutely incorrect. He never retired, but actively carried on his
mission upto the last day of his life. He made sure that the mission continued even after his death by
appointing a worthy successor like Guru Angad Dev, who was selected after a very rigorous test.
5.5 It is incorrect to say that Guru Nanak at first did not intend to found a society, or that he passed
his time partly in retirement, or that it became a military brotherhood because of Mughal persecution. Guru
Nanak’s system is based on a whole-life philosophy, involving full development of the individual and society
in their spiritual, social and economic aspects. Since his religion accepts combination of the spiritual and
empirical aspects of life, or the miri-piri doctrine, he organised a fraternal society, recommending total
participation and responsibility in all walks of life and making reaction against injustice an essential duty of the
religious man. It was in this context that militarisation of the society took place, since Sikhism permits the
use of force as a last resort for a righteous cause. The Indian society suffered from two major maladies, viz.,
caste discrimination in the social field and injustice and oppression in the political field. The Sikh society
created institutions and succeeded to a large extent in solving both of these problems. Guru Nanak founded
a classless community of his followers, in which everybody like himself, worked, and ate together from a
common kitchen in a pangat, regardless of caste or origin. His concept of equality between man and woman
was revolutionary. Most Indian traditions regarded her as a ‘temptress’, a ‘nagin?’, a ‘gateway to hell’,‘polluted’
and unworthy of spiritual pursuits. Elaborating the crucial role of woman in society and in life, Guru Nanak
asked, “How can you call one, who gives birth to kings, inferior >” Guru Nanak’s concept of perfect equality
arises from the immanence of God in all creatures. His love and concern for the common man expressed
itself in protests against exploitation of the poor and the weak. He condemned the brutalities and barbarities
perpetrated by the invaders, whom he described as ‘horde of sin.’ He took to task the local rulers for their
unpreparedness to face the invading armies and called them ‘man-eating beasts’, and their officials as ‘hounds’
for their exploitation of the poor, innocent and helpless subjects. He attacked the hypocrisy of the religious
leaders, who had become a party to the plunder and the exploitation. He criticised the_yog/s and the ascetics
for their parasitism and escapism. He raised a strong voice against oppression and injustice and exhorted the
people to resist these. In fact, he founded a society to resist evil in society and to fight injustice. Thus was
laid the foundation of the doctrine of miri-piri, which became a fundamental element in the Sikh philosophy.
VI. DICTIONARY OF COMPARATIVE RELIGION
Ed. $.G.F. Brandon; Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York, 1970 (Ninian Smart)
6.1 An Extract From The Entry On Sikhism Is Reproduced: “Sikhism : the Sikhs (literally “Disciples’),
though belonging originally to a movement designed to see unity between best in Islam and best in Hinduism
have evolved a distinctive religion and culture of their own. ...... The tendencies towards unified
devotionalism were crystallised in the life and teachings of Nanak, first of the ten Gurus or leaders of Sikh
community. He preached unity of God ......, centrality of devotion bhak#, summed up in the repetition of
divine name, equality of men of different castes, evils of image worship, importance of brotherly love and
need of a guru as a guide. None of these elements was precisely original to Nanak.” (page 576).
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
6.2 The above interpretation of Sikhism as a blend or amalgam of selected features drawn from
Hinduism and Islam, denying any originality to Guru Nanak, has been repeatedly advanced by some Western
scholars. This notion of syncretism is obviously based on a superficial study of Sikhism or the doctrines of
Guru Nanak. No religion has survived on borrowed ideas in history. Din-i-lahi of Akbar is a well-known
example. Sikhism is a revealed religion based on the mystic experience of its founder, Guru Nanak, of the
Reality or God. He saw God as ‘All Love, the rest He is ineffable.”34 He saw God as ‘Creator who is
immanent in His creation, loves it and looks after it” He saw God as ‘Ocean of Virtues.’ He Saw God as
Self-existent and as One who never takes birth. The roots of Guru Nanak’s religious life lie in his unique
experience of Love of God. Guru Nanak’s bhakti is not mere repetition of a name. His bhakti is an intense
love of God and His creation which expresses itself in the service of mankind and carrying out His altruistic
Will. In fact, the goal in Sikhism is to recognise and carry out the altruistic Will of God. Most religions are a
search for Truth. Guru Nanak went a step further. He said: “Truth is higher than everything; Higher still is
True Living.”3> Virtuous deeds based on morality and ethics form the crux of Guru Nanak’s system. ‘It is
one’s deeds that determine one’s closeness to God.” He believed the world to be real, as God’s creation and
decried its rejection as mithya. He rejected monasticism and ascetic ways of life and insisted upon a
householder’s life, accepting all domestic and social responsibilities as a part of the practice of religion. He
said, “He alone recognises the way to God, who earns an honest living and shares it with others in need.”*”
His notion of equality crossed all previous boundaries and assumed dimensions which can never be
surpassed. He not only condemned the thousands year old caste system, but took practical steps to abolish it.
His companion during his famous journeys was a low-caste Muslim, Mardana. At Kartarpur, he continued
his mission, created a society in which everybody worked and ate together from a common kitchen or /angar.
6.3 Evidently, Guru Nanak gave a completely new system of religious thought based upon his own
mystic experience. Its concept of the Ultimate Reality, nature of the Reality, its goals, the methods prescribed
to achieve the goal, its world-view and approach to life, its emphasis on moral and ethical deeds, its activism,
its acceptance of social responsibility, all point towards its uniqueness and independent status as a religion. It
is failure to grasp these elements that has led to suggestions of syncretism in the interpretation of Sikhism.
There are scores of hymns in Guru Granth Sahib, in which Guru Nanak criticises the old traditions. How
could he borrow anything from those traditions ? Of course, whatever was true in the old religions, and
conformed to his own spiritual experience, was included in the Guru’s system, since, as the Third Nanak
says, “Truth never becomes obsolete.’’8
6.4 Common areas are bound to exist amongst all religions; particularly monotheistic religions.
Sikhism is no exception. A few common features with Hinduism or Islam do not justify a syncretic
interpretation. In fact, there are more common features between Judaism and Christianity, than between any
other two religions. Hence, the suggestion is irrelevant and indicates the Christian missionary’s zeal, rather
than a factual reality.
VII. THE ENCYCLOPAEDIA AMERICANA INTERNATIONAL EDITION, VOLUME 24
American Corporation. International Headquarters 575 Lexington Avenue, New York. copyright Philipines, 1977
7.1 The Entry Includes The Following Observations : “Sikhs, seks, are followers of the Sikh religion,
particularly of Guru Gobind Singh and, by extension, a communal group of East Punjab, India ...... The
religion combines elements of Islam and Hinduism.”
“When Nanak began teaching in 1499, there was almost complete lawlessness under the weak Lodi
dynasty and the government was taking active measures to repress Hinduism. Nanak’s doctrines in large part
were a response to these chaotic conditions. The core of his belief was Hindu, but he was undoubtedly
greatly influenced by Islam.” (page 808)
7.2 The above views do not show any serious study or knowledge of Sikhism and are apparently
based on the ‘syncretic’ interpretation of Sikhism, which has been adopted by some Western writers without
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
carefully studying the origin and the doctrines of Sikhism or the teachings of its founder, Guru Nanak. This
view has been repudiated and correct position explained in an earlier section. The conclusion may, however,
be repeated that Sikhism is a revealed religion based on the mystic experience of Guru Nanak with the
Ultimate Reality or God who is the Creator of the universe. God is ineffable. He is All Love. He is
immanent in His creation, loves it and looks after it. A Sikh must express his love for God through service of
mankind. He should, therefore, stay in the world and discharge all his domestic and social responsibilities.
He should not reject the world as mithya or unreal. He should not take to monasticism or asceticism, which,
in the Guru’s opinion, are tantamount to parasitism and escapism. The goal of a Sikh is to carry out the
altruistic Will of God, which inevitably involves resistance to oppression and injustice. The Guru’s doctrines
have an eternal relevance, and it is wrong to call them a response to one particular situation that prevailed
under Lodi rule during the times of Guru Nanak. In fact, Guru Nanak’s system is a whole-life or miri-piri
system that in its essentials is opposed to the earlier Indian systems that are dichotomous, suggesting
withdrawal from empirical life and its responsibilities.
VIII. CONCLUSION
8.1 It should be clear from the preceding examples that many encyclopaedias published in the West
contain serious errors of fact as well as understanding of Sikh religion. The list given in this paper is by no
means exhaustive. It is only a sample. However, it should not be difficult to imagine the damage done to the
cause of Sikhism and the image of its followers by such wrong views being propagated in the numerous
encyclopaedias and other such publications in circulation. It is necessary, therefore, as indicated in the
beginning of this paper to examine all the enteries on Sikhism, contradict misrepresentations and take up the
matter with the publishers and editors concerned to ensure necessary corrections in future editions. The
present alarming situation demands strict vigilance on the part of scholars in particular and followers of
Sikhism in general.
REFERENCES
1. Macauliffe, M.A. : The Sikb Religion, Vol. I, Introduction; S. Chand & Co. New Delhi, 1963
edition, p. LX XIX.
Daljeet Singh: The Sikh Ideology, Guru Nanak Foundation, New Delhi, 1984, pp. 126-128.
Ibid., pp. 128-129.
Ibid., p. 128
Guru Granth Sahib : Sri Rag M-1, Astpadi 14.6., p. 62.
Ibid., M-1, Asa 1.3.
Ibid., Var Sri Rag M-1, Sloka 1, Pauri 3.
Ibid., Var Majh M-1, Pauri 10.
9. Ibid., Rag Parbhati 4.10.
10. Ibid., Sloka Sahaskirti 4.
11. Ibid., Sri rag, p. 15.
12. Ibid., Var Asa, p. 473.
13. Jagjit Singh : The Sikh Revolution, New Delhi, 1984.
14. Bhai Vir Singh : Devt Pujan Partal (Punjabi), Khalsa Samachar, Amritsar.
15. Guru Granth Sahib : Var Majh, M-1, p. 142.
16. Ibid., Ramkali M-1, p. 903.
17. Ibid., Sloka 1, p. 1412.
18. Ibid., M-1, p. 145.
19. Ibid., Tilang M-1, p. 722.
20. Ibid., Var Maru, M-5, p. 1102.
21. Guru Gobind Singh : Zafarnama.
22. Gokal Chand Narang: Transformation of Sikhism.
23. Guru Granth Sahib: Var Sorath, M-4; p. 646.
SPANAMRWN
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
24. Guru Gobind Singh : Zafarnama.
25. Guru Granth Sahib: Asa, M-1, p. 350.
26.Jodh Singh : Kartarpuri Bir de Darshan (Punjabi), Punjabi University Patiala, 1968 edition.
27. Daljeet Singh : Authenticity of Kartarpuri Bir, Punjabi University Patiala, 1987.
28. Guru Granth Sahib: Bhairon M-5, p. 1136.
29. Guru Gobind Singh : Bachittar Natak.
30. Bhai Gurdas : Varan, Var 1.42.
31. Guru Granth Sahib, p. 491.
32. Ibid., p. 1199
33. Ibid., p. 732.
34. Ibid., Asa, M-1, p. 459
35. Ibid., Sri Rag M-1, p. 62.
36. Ibid., Japu Ji, p. 8.
37. Ibid., Var Sarang M-4, p. 1245.
38. Ibid., Var Ramkali, p. 946.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
34
THE PUNJAB PROBLEM AND FUNDAMENTALISM
KHARAK SINGH
INTRODUCTION
A view is being propagated in some quarters that fundamentalism among the Sikhs today is
apparently the basic cause of the current political unrest in the Punjab. Without giving any evidence in
support of this contention, one such writer proceeds to describe it as ‘primarily a movement of resistance’
and ‘a universe that is characterised by incoherence and disorder.’ And then ‘as a social scientist’ he seeks to
provide ‘meaning and shape to what appears to be chaotic and meaningless’ or to discover ‘what may be
termed as theory and practice of the Sikh fundamentalist’, although on the authority of Jurgen Habermas,
quoted by him in the epigram, he maintains that ‘Meanings ...... can be made accessible only from the inside.”!
Incidentally, one would like to know whether he is interpreting the movement as an insider or outsider.
The author points out that ‘Sikh fundamentalists have not succeeded in articulating their vision of the
world in any great detail.” He attributes this ‘lack of an elaborate model’ to the ‘social origins of Sikh
activists.” He says, ‘A great majority of them come from the country side and would be classified as peasants
by social anthropologists. Historically, peasants have not been known to come up with grand paradigms of
social transformation. Peasant societies are by definition made up of little communities and their cosmos is
invariably parochial rather than universal.’ This is his favourite theory which can explain all major questions
relating to Sikhs and Sikhism. In an earlier paper read at Berkeley,? the author wrote : ‘if there is any such
thing as a key to a historical problem, in case of the Sikh tradition it is to be found in its social constituency.
Sikh religion is first and foremost a peasant faith. Sociologists have often spoken of how Islam is an urban
religion. Sikhism may be spoken of as a rural religion. When dealing with beliefs, rituals and practices of the
Sikhs — be they religious or political — it is always worthwhile to constantly remind ourselves that we are
fundamentally dealing with the peasantry.’
The above explanation is obviously unsatisfactory and inadequate. So the author also looks at
‘correlations between Punjab’s political economy and the nature of dissent in Sikh society, the demand for a
new personal law for the Sikhs, and finally the famous Anandpur Sahib Resolution, a document that may be
considered as the Magna Carta of Sikhs.’
The discussion of political economy revolves around the size of holdings, which is not of much help,
since their distribution and size are not significantly different from those in other states. The Green
Revolution is also prominently mentioned, particularly its social costs and the ‘polarisation of Punjabi society
over the last two decades.’ Some of the inferences are difficult to accept. For example, it has been stated that
small holdings, ranging from 2 to 5 hectares have become increasingly less viable. The Green Revolution
entails adoption of high yielding varieties and modern farming techniques, which raise productivity per unit of
land. So, if at all, the Green Revolution should make small holdings more viable than before. This enabled
even the subsistence farmer to spare something for the market after meeting his family requirements. Also,
the author has not explained why the Green Revolution occurred only in the Punjab, while the two major
requirements, viz., better varieties and modern technique of farming, were available in all the countries of
South Asia, including other states of India. Is it not due to the more progressive attitude of the Sikh peasants
of Punjab towards modern methods of farming ? However, in the author’s judgement using Weber’s litmus
test for modernity, Sikh fundamentalists ‘badly fail.’
In the entire discussion of the political economy and the Green Revolution, the author has not
suggested anything with fundamentalist connotations on the part of the Sikhs. Nor has he been able to point
out any such thing while dealing subsequently with the other two major topics that fill the body of his paper,
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
viz., the demand for Sikh personal law and the Anandpur Sahib Resolution. Hindus have a personal law. So
have the Muslims. They are not dubbed as fundamentalists on that score. Then how could Sikhs turn
fundamentalists by merely making such a demand ? The suggestion that the Sikhs do not have a uniform
code at the present moment, is no disqualification for making such a demand. Similarly in the Anandpur
Sahib Resolution the author himself does not find anything wrong, which is no more than a demand for
greater provincial autonomy, already voiced in several other states. The author himself concedes that it is,
like ‘an election manifesto of a political party’ in India or any other country.
The author’s own discussion lends little support to his thesis of Sikh fundamentalism. He is,
however, determined to put this tag on the Sikh struggle. Therefore, in the conclusion he formulates three
new ‘arguments’, which convince nobody except himself. These are : First, ‘in the Punjabi word moolvad
Sikhs possess a term that exactly corresponds to fundamentalism.’ Is it an agrument ? Second, ‘many
orthodox Sikhs have no patience for textual analysis of Sikh scriptures.’ The statement is baseless. But even
if it were correct, how could views of a few orthodox Sikhs expressed today, impart a fundamental character
to a demand made over 40 years ago ? Third, ‘the current Sikh movement manifests many tendencies like
millenarianism, a ptophetic vision, revivalism and puritanism, trends that are commonly associated with
fundamentalism.’ No evidence is given in support of this contention. The statement appears to be a product
of the author’s own ‘prophetic vision.’
In the quest for material to support his unsustainable thesis, the author (who is probably an
anthropologist) has wandered into areas of religion and politics where he does not belong. That is why he
has wasted his scholarship on matters which are completely irrelevant to the Sikh struggle. He has obviously
missed the real issues.
A few other scholars have also ventured to make uncalled for and ignorant observations concerning
the Punjab problem, it appears necessary to give a perspective historical account of the major issues
underlying this crisis. In this paper we shall mainly confine ourselves to the paper of Harjot Oberoi read at
Anaheim. In his paper there appears an evident attempt to camouflage the realities of the situation by
introducing unrelated matters like Sikh ideology, the mri piri concepts, modernity, Sikh pluralism, secularism,
the Nirankari issue, Turner’s theory of social structure, etc.
For our discussion we shall first take up the Punjab Problem and its genesis, which the author has
carefully avoided, and then discuss his observations to show their irrelevance, except as an attempted cover to
hide the realities in Punjab.
COMMITMENTS WITH SIKHS BEFORE 1947
In 1929 when Shri Jawahar Lal Nehru was the President, a formal resolution was passed by the
Indian National Congress at Lahore that no constitution of India would be finalised, until it was acceptable to
the Sikhs. The second assurance was the clear statement of Nehru in 1946 that there was nothing
objectionable in the Sikhs having an area demarcated in the North West of India, where they could enjoy the
‘glow of freedom.’ It was a significant statement, since it was given in the context of Jinnah’s offering to the
Sikhs consitutional guarantees in a separate state in the Eastern part of the contemplated Pakistan. Third,
there was the statement of Mahatma Gandhi° saying that his words should be accepted and that the Congress
would never betray anyone, and that if they did, the Sikhs knew how to use their &irpan. Finally, there was the
statement of Nehru’ in the Constituent Assembly in December 1946. While proposing a federal system with
autonomous states, he moved the executive resoultion, which envisaged “The Indian union as an
independent sovereign republic comprising autnomous units with residuary powers, wherein the ideals of
social, political and economic democracy would be guaranteed to all sections of the people, and adequate
safeguards would be provided for minorities, backward commmunities and areas.” Nehru described the
resolution as a “Declaration, a pledge and an undertaking before the world, a contract of millions of Indians,
and therefore in the nature of an oath which we want to keep.” These were some of the commitments
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
regarding an autonomous area in a federal system, which the Congress had solemnly given to the Sikhs, on
the basis of which they had agreed to throw their lot with India.
COMMITMENTS VIOLATED
Unfortunately, after 1947 the Congress completely changed its views and stand. The Sikhs were
aghast, when the draft of the proposed Indian Constitution was circulated to the State Assemblies in 1949,
because, instead of autonomous states and a federal constitution, the draft was for a purely unitary type of
structure. Unanimously, all the Sikhs of the Punjab Assembly objected to the draft and wrote as follows :8 “It
has been the declared policy of the Congress that India is to be a union of autonomous states, and each unit
is to develop in its own way, linguistically, culturally and socially. Of course, Defence, Communications and
Foreign Affairs must remain the Central Subjects. To change the basic policy now, is to run counter to the
oft-repeated creed of the Congress.” “In the considered opinion of the Akali Dal the residuary powers
should be with the states.” “The list distributing legislative powers should be based on the principle that the
Centre or the Union Parliament should be limited to Defence, Communications and Foreign Affairs only.”
But in 1950 the Congress, violating the earlier assurances and policies, framed a constitution, leaning heavily
towards a unitary form of Government. In protest the Akali members declined to sign it. It is evident that
the Anandpur Sahib Resolution of 1978° is just a reiteration of Nehru’s commitments in the Constituent
Assembly in 1946 and of the reminder the Sikh Legislators unanimously gave in 1949 to the Central
Government, that it was violating its repeated assurances. Hence it is sheer ignorance on the part of the
author to suggest that it is a “document of secession.” Neither was Nehru a secessionist, nor would he or the
Congress have made a commitment that could be detrimental to the interests of the country. Is it the
function of a scholar just to be the mouthpiece of the Establishment and echo its voice, or to detail and
examine the problem ? The latter the author has failed to do either out of ignorance or design. In fact, while
the Sikhs in 1949 suggested three subjects for the centre, the Anandpur Sahib Resolution proposed Currency,
too, to be a Central subject. Thus, factually, it is the Congress and the Central Government who have shifted
their stand. The Sikhs are obviously not asking for anything new and unreasonable.
A DIAMETRIC CHANGE
It was soon after Independence that the Sikhs felt that the Centre or the Congress had diametrically
deviated in their approach and policy towards them. The major indication was its framing a unitary form of
constitution, with Sikhs to be kept a permanent minority in the State. A very significant indication of the
biased Central approach to the Sikhs is what Patel conveyed to Master Tara Singh, when he wanted a Punjabi
Suba to be carved out. No less a person than the Prime Minister Charan Singh has described it thus :!°
“When Master Tara Singh was there, he was talking of Pubjabi Suba. Then he had a talk with Sardar Patel.
Sardar Patel said: I am ready to concede it. But you will have only that much land that falls to your share on
grounds of population. So Punjab area will be halved. Now you form 17% of the Army. They will have to
be dismissed. Are you prepared for it ?”
The above made it plain what would thereafter be the Central approach towards the Sikhs.
The Sikhs are known for their love and struggle for freedom. This new policy, the Sikhs feel, is aptly
described by Machiavelli’s observations,!! “Those states which have been acquired or accustomed to live at
liberty under their own laws, there are three ways of holding them. The first is to despoil them; the second is
to go and live there in person; the third is to allow them to live under their own laws, taking tribute of them,
and creating within the country a government composed of a few who will keep it friendly to you. Because
this government, being created by the Prince, knows that it cannot exist without his friendship and
protection, will do all it can to keep them.” We shall see if the events of the subsequent years, justify the
feelings and apprehensions of the Sikhs.
THE STRUGGLE STARTS
Following this complete change in the Central policy and disregard of its commitments, the Sikhs
started an agitation for creation of a Punjabi speaking linguistic state in the North West. The Congress had
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
been committed to creating homogenous linguistic states in the country and reorganising provincial
boundaries. Accordingly, a State Reorganisation Commission was set up to propose boundaries of new
linguistic states. But strangely enough, while it recommended the formation of other linguistic states, it
specifically suggested that Punjabi linguistic state should not be formed. Another indication of Central policy
was that in 1956, instead of forming a Punjabi linguistic state, as in other areas, it merged the Pepsu State, in
which the Sikhs were in a majority, in the East Punjab, thereby reducing the Sikhs to a minority in the new
state. The struggle for Punjabi speaking linguistic state continued for over a decade. In 1965 the war with
Pakistan broke out, and against all apprehensions, the Sikhs suspended their agitation and whole-heartedly
supported the war effort. This they did in the national interest, merely on a promise of the Prime Minister
that their demand would be considered later on. The Sikh contribution to the wat was so impressive, both by
the people and the soldiers, that after the War, the Prime Minister appointed a Parliamentary Committee to
report regarding the formation of a Punjabi speaking state. At the same time the Congress Party also
resolved that a linguistic Punjabi speaking state should be carved out of the then Punjab. But it is very
interesting and revealing to know the mind of Mrs. Indira Gandhi, the then Information Minister, and Sh.
Gulzari Lal Nanda, the then Home Minister to the Government of India, who was at the Government level
to give effect to the proposal of the Parliamentary Committee. Hukam Singh’, then Speaker of the Lok
Sabha writes :
“The Prime Minister was reported to have observed on November 26, 1982, when releasing some
books published by the Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee (HT. Nov. 27), that ‘When the
Punjabi speaking State was formed, the suggestion made by the Committee headed by Sardar Hukam Singh
had been accepted.’ This was not so, according to her statements in My Truth (p.117). Unfortunately, Mr.
Shastri had made Sardar Hukam Singh, the Speaker of the Lower House, Chairman of the Parliamentary
Committee on Punjabi Suba although he was very biased in favour of Punjabi Suba ......
‘T went to Mr. Chavan and said, I had heard that Sardar Hukam Singh was going to give a report in
favour of Punjabi Suba, and that he should be stopped ......’
‘Once the Prime Minister’s appointee had declared himself in favour of Punjabi Suba, how could we
get out of it.’
“Mrs. Gandhi along with Mr. Chavan, could see Mr. Shastri with much difficulty, and when they did,
Mr. Shastri just said that he was fully in touch with the situation and that they need not bother. (Ibid. p.118).
‘But I was very bothered, and I went around seeing everybody. Of course, once the report came, it was too
late to change it.”
“Lal Bahadur Shastri continued the policy of Jawahar Lal Nehru, and was as dead against the demand
of Punjabi Suba as was Nehru. So, when he was urged upon by Mrs. Gandhi to stop Hukam Singh, he did
not waste any time. Mr. Shastri called Mr. Gulzari Lal Nanda, then Home Minister, to his residence, and
conveyed to him the concern about the feared report. I was contacted on the telephone. Mr. Shastri
disclosed that Mr. Nanda was with him, and had complained that he had suggested my name (Hukam Singh,
for the Chairmanship of the Parliamentary Committee under the mistaken impression, which he had formed
during a casual talk with me, that I believed that Punjabi Suba would not be of any advantage to the Sikhs
ultimately, but that now I appeared determined to make a report in its favour.”
“T answered that the facts were only partly true. I had told Mr. Nanda that Punjabi suba would not
ultimately be of much advantage to the Sikhs. But I had also added that the issue had by then become one of
sentiment and had roused emotions. Therefore it was not possible to argue with, much less to convince, any
Sikh about the advantages or disadvantages of Punjabi suba. Every Sikh considered the denial as
discrimination. I further enquried from Mr. Shastri, whether I had not expressed the same opinion to him
and his answer was in the affirmative. I myself offered to confront Mr. Nanda by immediately rushing to Mr.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Shastti’s residence, but he said there was no need. This disillusioned me. The intention of the Government
then was to use me against my community, secure an adverse report, and then reject the demand.”
“The Govt. has never seen merit in any Sikh demand. The Das Commission in 1948 recommended
postponement of reorganisation on the plea, zwter alia, that if once begun in the South, it might intensify the
demand by Sikhs in the North. The J.V.P. committee (Jawaharlal, Vallabh Bhai Patel and Pattabhi
Sitaramayya), when reviewing the Das report, gratuitously remarked that no question of rectification of
boundaries in the provinces of Northern India should be raised at the present moment, whatever the merit of
such a proposal might be.”
“And this became the future policy. Nehru struck to it. Shastri continued the same, and Indira
Gandhi has made no departure.”
“Every effort was made by Mrs. Gandhi, Mr. Shastri, and Mr. Nanda to stop me from making my
report.”
Why the government had been so strongly against the Parliamentary Committee making a report in
favour of Punjabi Suba and why Mrs. Gandhi had felt bothered and ran about seeing everybody to stop
Hukam Singh, has been explained by Mrs. Gandhi herself. “The Congress found itself in a dilemma, to
concede the Akali demand would mean abandoning a position to which it was firmly committed and letting
down its Hindu supporters in the Punjabi Suba (p.117, My Truth).” The Government has always been very
particular about not “letting down its Hindu supporters.” The Congress could not depend upon Sikh voters
and out of political considerations could not suffer losing Hindu votes also. Therefore, the Congress failed to
do justice to the Sikhs.
“The first schedule of the Regional Committee Order 1957 contained Ropar, Morinda and
Chandigarh assembly constituencies in Ambala district in the Punjab region.”
“The subsequent reference to the Shah Commission was loaded heavily against Punjab. Making the
1961 census as the basis and the tehsil as the unit was a deliberate design to punish the Sikhs. The language
returns in the 1961 census were on communal lines.
“Therefore the demarcation had to be on a communal rather than on a linguistic basis.”
“Consequently merit was again ignored and justice denied. Naturally, tensions between the two
communities increased. If the Sachar formula, worked out in 1949 had been accepted, there would not have
been any further conflict, if the Regional Formula had been allowed to be implemented, there would not have
been any further discontent. And if Punjabi Suba had been demarcated simply on a linguistic basis, and not
on false returns in 1961, there would not have been any extremist movement.”
It clearly shows that the demand for a linguistic state, a policy which was an old one with the
Congress and which had been implemented in the rest of India, was to be denied in the Punjab, because Sikhs
would become a majority there and come into power under the democratic process. Henceforward, it would
seem that the Central Government has been following the three pronged policy of despoiling Punjab, ruling it
by stooge governments, and imposing President’s rule, if and when, by the democratic process, a non-
Congress government came into power in the state. The subsequent history of the Punjab has been just a
struggle between the Sikhs, historically known for their love of liberty, and the Centre pursuing the above
policy. Both Mrs. Indira Gandhi and Shri Nanda were concerned and worried about the proposal for a
Punjabi Suba being accepted by the Congress. The proposal was conceded only after over fifty thousand
Sikhs had courted arrest, and scores had died during the peaceful agitation.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
A SUB-STATE CREATED
The Parliamentary Committee having recommended the creation of a Punjabi Suba, the Home
Minister got passed an Act, the Punjab Reorganisation Act, 1966, which in its implication was not only a
denial to Punjab of a status equal to that of other states in the country, but also involved a permanent ceiling
on the economic, social and political growth of the state and its people. The Act had the following crippling
provisions and limitations :
1. For the development of every state in India two things are basic, namely, water and energy. As it
is, Punjab, because of its rivers and very great hydel power potential, is fortunate. Under the Constitution of
India, and everywhere under international law and practice, Irrigation and Power are state subjects (Item 17
of the State List read with Article 246 of the Constitution). These are under the exclusive executive and
legislative jurisdiction of the states. But by the provision of Section 78 to 80 of the Reorganisation Act, the
Centre unconstitutionally kept to itself the power of control, maintenance and development of the waters and
hydel power of the Punjab rivers. This was a clear violation of the Constitution. In other words, Punjab
became a state which could do nothing for the control and development of its rivers, utilisation of their
waters and exploitation of their hydel power potential. Thus Punjab became administratively and legislatively
an ineffective and inferior state, which could do nothing for the economic development of its people. The
question of political growth could not arise, because it had permanently been reduced to a sub-state without
scope for regaining control of its waters and hydel power. Hence, progress towards autonomy became out of
question.
2. The second limitation concerned the territorial boundaries of the states. In 1949 under the well-
known Sachar Formula the state government indicated, upto a village, the boundaries of Punjabi speaking and
Hindi speaking areas. Later, under an Act of Parliament, known as the Regional Formula, Punjabi speaking
and Hindi speaking areas of the old Punjab were demarcated and separate legislative Committees representing
the two areas were constituted. The Sachar Formula and the Regional Formula had been accepted and
worked without any objection from the people, legislators or Ministers of the areas concerned, until 1966.
Instead of accepting the settled boundaries, as had been recommended by the Parliamentary Committee
proposing the formation of the Punjabi Suba, the Government appointed a Commission to redetermine the
boundaries and thus to reopen and make controversial a settled issue. In fact, areas which were Punjabi
speaking or were under the functional control of Punjab, were excluded from the Punjabi Suba, and the
Commission excluded not only settled Punjabi speaking contiguous areas, but also the State capital from the
Suba, even though it had been consituted by acquiring Punjabi speaking villages, and in every other
reorganised state the capital had remained with the parent state. An area almost equal to half of the present
Himachal Pradesh, was transferred from the Punjab to Himachal Pradesh though they were known Punjabi
speaking areas. Even the site of the Bhakra Dam which was constructed solely by the Punjab Government
and had always been under its functional control, was kept out of Punjab, although the area is Punjabi
speaking. At the same time, Simla and other hill stations were transferred to Himachal Pradesh.
DEMANDS AFTER 1966
The new state being basically handicapped, an agitation for redressal of the grievances started soon
after 1966, because it was anticipated that its future under the created discriminations would be ruinous for
the people. The salient demands of this agitation were as follows :
(a) Satluj, Ravi and Beas, being purely Punjab rivers, and their waters and hydel power being
indispensable for the economy of the State, no water or hydel power should be allotted to non-riparian states
like Rajasthan, Haryana or Delhi, because such an allocation would be unconstitutional. The issue could,
therefore, be referred to the Consitution Bench of the Supreme Court. In no other state at the time of
reorganisation had the provisions of the Consitutions been violated to deprive it of its wealth of water and
hydel power as in Punjab.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
(b) The boundaries that had been accepted by all concerned, including the people and the legislators,
should not be disturbed to deprive the new state of known Punjabi speaking areas, through a Centrally-
appointed Commission.
(c) The Central Government’s order that recruitment to Defence Services should be based on the
population of a state, was unconstitutional, being violative of Articles 15 and 16 of the Indian Constitution,
which state that in the matter of recruitment to Public Services no distinction could be made on the basis of
place of birth of an individual. The object of this order could evidently be to reduce the strength of Sikhs,
which was originally about 20%, to below 2% which was to be the share of Punjab on the basis of its
population during future recruitment to Defence Forces. Actually, the strength of the Sikhs in the Defence
Forces had already been reduced to about 8%, and the Sikhs apprehended that the new policy would further
reduce their strength to 2% or less. This unconstitutional policy of the Government has been a major cause
for distress in the rural areas of the Punjab. As kbs of families were dependent on the profession of
soldiery for their livelihood, and since the percentage of the Sikh soldiers in the army became increasingly
reduced, this caused serious economic dissatisfaction among the youth in rural areas of Punjab, especially
when they found that in other states candidates with lower physical fitness standards were accepted. As this
policy related only to the Defence Services, where Sikhs, because of their tradition, aptitude and fitness were
eminently suitable for selection, it created a serious sense of discrimination against them in the policy of the
Central Government.
(d) Even before Independence, the keeping of A/rpan (sword) was accepted as a religiously prescribed
weat for Sikhs. Its wear by a Sikh has been guaranteed under the Law and the Indian Constitution. During
British days there had been a specific agitation for this freedom. But now the Central Government issued an
order placing restrictions on the carrying of kirpan in certain situations. This order was considered violative
of the Indian Constitution. Hence the demand was for withdrawl of the unconstitutional restrictions.
Apart from the Anandpur Sahib Resolution, which will be discussed separately, the above were the
four major demands of the Sikhs after 1966. These demands were reasonable and legitimate, and since the
Constitution provides a specific forum for their solution, the Government, if it intended, could have lawfully
settled them without the least objection from any party or State. No one could say that the constitutional
issues should not be referred to the Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court, which was the body to give a
verdict on them, and once the decision had been made, no party could raise any objection. So far as the
territorial matter was concerned, the demand was equally valid, because it required that the borders that stood
settled and accepted by the people of the areas, and the decision embodied in an Act of Parliament, should
not be arbitrarily altered through a Commission. But what could be settled in one day, has been made to
linger on for decades, and the Congress dominated Central Government has consistently failed to follow the
constitutional path or to maintain the status quo on a settled issue. Instead of giving the long history of the
Akali agitation over the last about a quarter of a century, we shall, for the sake of brevity, confine our
discussion mainly to the two issues of river waters and the Anandpur Sahib Resolution.
RIVER WATERS AND HYDEL POWER ISSUES
After Independence roughly 38 MAF of river waters fell to the share of East Punjab in India. Of
these, about 32 MAF were carried by the three Punjab rivers, Satluj, Beas and Ravi, and the remaining 5.6
MAF were carried by the Jamuna in Haryana area or the Jamuna Basin. Excluding 5.6 MAF of Jamuna (only
part of which was utilised in Haryana area of erstwhile Punjab), of the remaining over 32 MAF, about 9 MAP
were being utilised in the Punjabi Suba area, and one MAF was used in the Gang Canal for the Bikaner State,
which had an agreement with Punjab for a limited period, on payment of royalty to Punjab for the use of that
water. In short, about 22 MAF of Punjab waters were still available for use of the State. Actually a
considerable part of the 22 MAF was being used in the Pakistan area, before 1947. But after the Partition
these waters fell to the share of Indian Punjab.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
The second essential point is that Punjab is short of water. As Dr Lowdermilk!3 has pointed out,
sweet water is going to be a scarce commodity and a limiting factor in the development of an area or state in
the coming century. Agricultural experts have estimated that 5 to 6 acre feet of water are the annual
rquirements of an acre for growing two crops like wheat and paddy, the recommended rotation in the state.
The cultivable area in Punjab being 105 /¢kd/ acres, the annual requirements of surface water come to about
52.5 MAF. But the available waters are only 32 MAF, of which about 0.6 MAF have to go the co-riparian
Jammu and Kashmir. In sum, Punjab is woefullly deficient in the availability of river waters to meet the
requirements of its cultivated area. Here we should like to state two points :
First, we cannot for want of space give the entire history of the allotment of the river waters. We
shall record only the result of the decision made by the Central Government. Second, we shall give only
approximate figures, because these have been marginally changed by different assessments and are still under
controversy. The figures given will be the accepted data during the period before 1970.
The Reorganisation Act has a provision that in case of any dispute between Punjab and Haryana
regarding the Beas Project, the Centre would be the arbitrator. Apart from the provision being considered
violative of the Constitution, it was really unnecessary, because the Beas Project had been framed and
finalised long before 1966, and envisaged the allotment of only about 0.9 MAF to the Haryana area. Such
projects are always drawn in great detail, including plans for utilisation of water, channels, commanded area,
and water to be supplied to each channel, distributary or water course. As such, the very provision in the Act
was superfluous, except as a lever for its unwarranted use, as has been revealed later. After 1966, Haryana
drew up a project, Satluj Yamuna Link Canal, which is supposed to carry 5 MAF of water from Punjab rivers.
The Central Government approved of it. Punjab did not accept its validity, being a post-Reorganisation
project and not a part of the Beas Project. Because of the dispute the Centre gave an award, and the final
result broadly is that out of the 22 MAF, only about 5 MAF have been allotted to the Punjab, while 8 MAF
go to Rajasthan and the remaining to Haryana. In short after 1947, about three fourths of the available
waters of the Punjab state have been allotted to non-riparian areas of Haryana, Rajasthan and Delhi.
We shall briefly mention the three stages of this long controversy. The first stage is the arbitration
awatd by the Prime Minister, Mrs. Indira Gandhi, in 1976 allotting, excluding flow of Satluj waters of the
Bhakra Project, 3.5 MAF each to Punjab and Haryana, 0.2 MAF to Delhi, leaving the remaining for Rajasthan
which had been earlier earmarked under an executive order of the Centre. Following the defeat of Mrs.
Indira Gandhi in the 1977 elections, an Akali-cum-Jan Sangh Ministry was formed in the Punjab. After
obtaining expert legal advice, they filed a case in the Supreme Court questioning the award of the Prime
Minister and the vires of the Punjab Reorganisation Act of 1966. The third stage is that soon after Indira
Gandhi returned to power at the Centre, she dismissed the Akali Ministry in Punjab, and later called a
meeting of the three Congress Chief Ministers of Rajasthan, Haryana and Punjab, and made them sign an
agreement virtually endorsing the earlier award. It gave 8.6 MAF to Rajasthan, 3.5 MAF to Haryana, 0.2 to
Delhi, and 4.2 MAF only to riparian Punjab. Following the agreement, the case pending before the Supreme
Court was withdrawn by the Punjab Government, and the Prime Minister, Mrs. Gandhi laid the foundation
of the SYL Canal. Thus a constitutional attempt to have a decision of the Supreme Court on the
fundamental constitutional issue was frustrated, following executive decisions. The conclusion is
incontrovertible that the diversion of Punjab’s water and hydel power resources to non-riparian states has
been done by the Centre by resort to extra-judicial measures and by frustrating the constitutional process,
which the Akali Ministry had sought to follow. It only shows that all through the Centre was aware that the
allotment was not constitutional and the Supreme Court would not endorse the validity of the
unconstitutional provisions of the Reorganisation Act, 1966, and what it had decided regarding the allotment
of Punjab waters and hydel power to non-riparian states.
Here, two other points need to be mentioned. There is a provision in the Reorganisation Act, that
hydel power from Punjab rivers will go to Haryana in proportion to the allotment of water. Second, the
agreement of 1981 among the three states only related to water of Punjab rivers. The constitutional issue
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
about the provision concerning hydel power of these rivers was outside the scope of that agreement.
Accordingly, it was still open to a future Punjab Government to raise before the Supreme Court the
constitutional issue about the validity of the Reorganisation Act concerning hydel power. As such, the entire
Reorganisation Act could be got declared unconstitutional, thereby upsetting the apple cart of all allotments
of water and hydel power to non-riparian states. The Centre’s consciousness about its unconstitutional
course appears evident from the fact that in May 1984 during the President’s Rule the Punjab Governor
entered into the extra-judicial agreement with Haryana and Rajasthan, providing that future disputes, if any,
among them shall not be referred to the Supreme Court, but shall be decided through a nominee or a
Tribunal appointed by the Central Government.
Without going into the history of such decisions regarding the Narmada and other river waters in
India, we shall quote only one decision made by a California Court! in February 1988. The case related to a
petition by the Federal Government that its lands situated in California be allowed some irrigation from a
stream in South California. Until then the private land owners on the basis of their riparian rights were not
allowing the use of the river water to even Government lands in the State. The Court decided that while the
Federal lands might be allowed waters, the water use for State lands would be subordinated to the needs of
the current water users in the State. This is to emphasise that, not to speak of allowing water to non-tiparian
states, the priority of private water users is so strong and universal that until Feb. 1988 the private land
owners were not allowing water to even Government lands. This priority is evidently based on the principle
that since for centuries on end, it is the people of a state that suffer loss in property, land and life from the
floods and vagaries of rivers, they alone in equity have the corresponding right of having benefits from the
waters ort hydel power of those streams.
In no democratic country in Europe, America or India is there a decision contrary to the riparian
principle which is also embodided in the Indian Constitution. One fact alone will show the equity of the
riparian law. In 1988 the Punjab floods caused a havoc. The loss in erosion and silting of land, damage to
crops, houses, property and cattle, apart from the loss of scores of human lives, was estimated at over a
billion Dollars! in that single year. Neither Rajasthan, nor Haryana, nor Delhi suffered even a penny worth
of loss or damage from Punjab rivers of which they had been made the principal beneficiaries. The above
highlights the contradiction and evident injustice that while riparian Punjab continues to suffer such damages,
the non-ripatian states reap each year benefits and production of over a billion Dollars.
In India, too, there is a clear cut decision in the Narmada waters case,'® saying that Rajasthan being a
non-riparian state has no rights to its waters whatsoever. In that case Rajasthan itself pleaded that even
though non-riparian, it was getting Punjab waters, and on that analogy it should be allowed waters from the
Narmada. But it was held that Rajasthan was non-riparian v7s-a-vis Punjab rivers, and Punjab’s committment
to Rajasthan was that it would supply water, only if it was surplus to its needs. This is to stress that knowing
full well all this and other judicial decisions and rulings of the Indian Courts on the subject, the Congress
dominated Central Government has consciously violated the riparian principle, and when challenged, avoided
a judicial verdict on this constitutional issue.
DISASTROUS EFFECT OF DRAIN OF PUNJAB WATERS AND POWER
The ruinous and despoiling effects of Central decisions are large scale both in the fields of agriculture
and industry. At present out of 105 4ké acres of cultivated land in the Punjab, about 92 /akbs are irrigated
including about 37 dakhs by canals and the rest by tubewells. This indicates that the major part of irrigation
and Punjab prosperity and production are due to private effort and enterprise. First, the capital cost and
maintenance and running costs of these over 8 ak/ tubewells are a heavy burden on the production costs of
crops in the state. Current cost of tubewell irrigation is 3 to 10 times more than canal irrigation, depending
upon the source of power. Apart from the fact that uninterrupted suppply of power from diesel or electricity
is hardly assured, the heavy overdrawal of subsoil water exceeds the annual recharge by rains, seepage, etc.
This is lowering the water table each year by one to ten feet. The present position of tubewell irrigation is
that between 80 to 90 percent of the Community Blocks in the state have been branded as unsuitable for
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
irrigation by tubewells. The clear warning given is that by the close of the century, the majority of these
tubewells would become non functional because of the continuous fall of the water table. The second point
is that available estimates suggest that ten kh acres of existing canal irrigated areas especially from the
Sithind Canal area, would lose facility of canal water because water at present used in the state will have to be
diverted to Haryana and Rajasthan under the present decision. In short, because of the lowering water table
and diversion of canal waters, about 60% of the area or about 50 kbs acres would become barani or
unirrigated. Under the present cropping system, the question of dry farming does not arise. The holdings of
small farmers being what they are, the resultant misery of a major part of the rural population can well be
imagined. Its very serious effects on economic and social conditions in the state and their disturbing
influence on the political life should be obvious. The annual loss of agricultural production would be of the
order of 1.2 billion Dollars. The loss in consequential industrial production and in the diversion of hydel
power to other states would be still greater. The unfortunate part is that whereas hydel power from Punjab is
being allotted to other states, thermal power plants are being installed in Punjab. These being dependent on
coal from distant states, the electricity generated by them is obviously several times more expensive than
hydel power.
ANANDPUR SAHIB RESOLUTION
As explained, the basis of the Anandpur Sahib Resolution is not any snap decision or secessionist
trend in Punjab politics. It simply asks for implementation of the assurances given by the Central leadership
before 1947. Since 1949, the Akalis have been pressing the Central Government to give effect to their earlier
policies and assurances. Since then the following additional factors have arisen to make it necessary that
states should have autonomous power :
(a) In 1971 the Tamil Nadu Assembly adopted the Rajmanner Report, which requires that the Centre
should have only four subjects as in the Anandpur Sahib Resolution, and in addition, there should be a
consultative committee of Chief Ministers of states presided over by the Prime Minister to advise the Centre
regarding the four Central subjects. Such views have also been expressed by West Bengal and other non-
Congress Ministries.
(b) In the preceding 40 years the Centre has amended the Constitution a number of times to make it
more centralised. For example, Education, Administration of Justice and Constitution of Courts, have been
made either concurrent or Central subjects. The percentage of discretionary grants to be given to the states
from the Central revenue has been raised very considerably, thereby enabling the Centre to favour or punish
any state it may like to do.
(c) The Centre has created non-statutory or extra-constitutional bodies like the Planning
Commission, the Water and Power Commission, the University Grants Commission, etc., which have great
powers not only to make financial allocations, but also have unfettered discretion to approve or disapprove
state schemes which fall exclusively within the sphere of state functioning. By this method, the Centre could
completely throttle all development in a state, should it choose to do so. A classic case is the construction of
the Punjab Project of the Thein Dam which was to cost originally only 70 crores, but Punjab failed to receive
final approval from the Power Commission even though in the mean time its cost has risen to over 800 crores.
(d) Another factor is the frequent Central intrusion in state affairs by creating instability in a state and
introducing President’s rule. For example, whenever a non-Congress Ministry was constitutionally formed in
the Punjab, it was destabilised, followed by the President’s rule. This was felt to be a negation of the
democratic will of the people.
(e) As the disastrous shackle of the Punjab Reorganisation Act makes Punjab a sub-state, the only
way to promote socio-political progress in the state was to have full autonomy in the sphere of all
development, planning and administration including control of water and hydel power of Punjab rivers.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
(f) Under the existing political set-up, as in the Punjab Reorganisation Act, the Centre has insisted on
the construction of the Rajasthan Canal despite all expert advice to the contrary. International experts from
the World Bank and other institutions clearly emphasised that the Project was economically unjustifiable and
wasteful, and that at far less expense the use of Punjab river waters could be far more productive if utilised
within the state. It shows that the Central decision neither served the national interests nor those of the
Punjab.
(g) Economic exploitation of Punjab in other fields has also been going on. Over 75% of the savings
in Punjab Banks are diverted outside the state in order to develop other areas. Industrial licensing and
approval of projects being in Central hands, it has not allowed more than 2% of the cotton produced in the
Punjab to be processed within the state. Similarly, while Punjab is a major sugarcane producing area, large
scale imports of sugar still take place from other states. Another way of serious curtailment of the wealth of
rural Punjab, which sustains about 80% of the population, is by low pricing and monopoly procurement of
wheat and rice which are in Central hands. Punjab suffers the most because about 60% of wheat and a large
part of rice are procured from Punjab by the Centre for distribution in deficit or urban areas in other states.
We have indicated above some of the Central measures that have seriously curtailed Punjab’s
Agricultural and Industrial growth. In fact, the Reorganisation Act has put a permanent ceiling on the
economic, social and political development of the state. It is in this context that the assurances of the
Congress leaders, and the Akali demand of 1949 were revived in 1973, because it became evident that in the
existing set-up economic and social growth of the people of the Punjab stood completely arrested. Hence the
need of autonomy in the field of development and administrative subjects, as envisaged in the Anandpur
Sahib Resolution, became inevitable.
Evidently it is sheer bias on the part of a scholar to make a complete black-out of the context, the
steps taken by the Centre and the political events in the Punjab and other states that have given rise to the
Anandpur Sahib Resolution demanding state autonomy, and approvingly to endorse the Anandpur Sahib
Resolution ‘as a document of secession.’ In the current political thinking both in the world and in India, it
looks so incongruous for even a journalist, much less for a scholar to brand a simple demand for autonomy
as secessionist. We give below by way of a sample a recent statement of a Central Minister, George
Fernandes, who observed at a seminar on Indian nationalism, Problems and Challenges, that !’ “The growing
militancy by the youth was a clear indication that the politicians had failed to solve the problems of the
country. The only answer was to have a new constitution, providing a genuine decentralised state with
development activity being the responsibility of the people.” “If the country had adopted decentralisation
instead of going in for centralised planning, there would not have been a single village in the country with a
drinking water problem.”
The author H. Oberoi has unnecessarily and illogically raised the issue of Sikh personal law, and tried
to relate it to so-called Sikh fundamentalism. First, there is nothing fundamentalist in making a political
demand. Second, Sikhs have undoubtedly a separate religion, a separate scripture and a separate socio-
political identity and world-view. Accordingly, there is nothing abnormal or irrational, if the Sikhs, like the
Muslims or the Hindus, want to have a separate personal law; it is the right of every ethnic community to
make such a demand.
It is ridiculous for anyone to suggest, as has been done by Oberoi, that after the grant of autonomy
the Sikhs would ban tobacoo, drugs or alcohol. Nothing of this sort was done by Ranjit Singh even in the
nineteenth century. The Punjab Assembly has power even today to ban tobacco or alcohol, but nothing of
the kind has happened, although some other states have introduced prohibition. It appears hardly rational to
raise such a bogey. It reminds one of the fears expressed by some politicians that hens would stop laying
eggs, if the steam locomotive invented by Stephenson was introduced. As explained earlier, the real object of
Oberoi appears to be political, and the aim seems to be to misrepresent the justification and political necessity
of the demand for state automomy. For, otherwise, it is difficult to accept that he is absolutely unaware of
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
the basic importance of water and hydel power, territorial, recruitment and other issues in reference to Punjab
and the demand for autonomy in many other parts of the country.
FUNDAMENTALISM
From the point of view of academic studies the point is completely irrelevant to the subject under
consideration, because fundamentalism is related only to the literal acceptance of many of the stories and
assertions in the Bible, which under modern conditions are not accepted by many. For example, it has been
stated that the world is only a few thousand years old. There is nothing in the Sikh scripture or the Sikh
ideology, which appears in any way illogical to modern thought. In fact it is the modernity that is its basic
feature and is the reason for its departure from the earlier Indian religions. It is not our intention to give
offence to any old relgion, but we all know that they have their statements which are questioned even by men
of the faith. Hence, it appears necessary to give the Sikh world-view, so that Oberoi’s contentions could be
assessed in the correct ideological perspective.
Sikhism is free from any historical or mythical assumptions. It is a monotheistic faith with the belief
that the basic Force or God is Love, and He is both transcendent and immanent in His creation. Love being
dynamic, the mother of all values, and directive, God is deeply interested in His creation, and operates
through His altruistic Will. As such, the seeker’s goal is to carry out His Will. This makes for the reality of
the world, instead of its being an illusion (mithya) or a suffering, as is considered by some other religions.
Hence, Guru Nanak emphasises four things : First, that in life the spiritual dimension must be combined
with the empirical dimension in order to live a full and fruitful life. This forms the basis of the miri-piri
doctrine laid down by him. Second, that the ideal of man is not personal salvation or merger in Brahman, but
working in tune with the altruistic Will of God. Our present malady is that we live an egoistic life, and remain
alienated from the real force of Love, that is operative in the world and forms the base of all moral life.
Third, in pursuance of the above logic Guru Nanak rejected the system of monasticism, asceticism, other-
worldliness, caste ideology and the prevaling concepts of pollution, and woman being a temptress. No
prophet in the world has made such radical changes in the then contemporary religious thought as did Guru
Nanak. Fourth, he prescribed that man’s assessment would be made on his deeds alone. It is in this context
that he stated that “Truth is higher than every thing, but truthful living is higher still.’ A major corollary of
his system of truthful living, which is its central element, is man’s duty to participate in social life and accept
total social responsibility. or that end he suggested that for the religious man, work, production and
equitable distribution are essential, as also the responsibility of confronting or resisting injustice and
oppression. Because he calls God the Destroyer of evil-doers and the demoniacal. In order to enable the
religious man to discharge the responsibility of resisting oppression, he rejected the doctrine of ahimsa or
pacificism, which had been an integral part of all Indian religions. And it is in this context he gave the call
that whosoever wanted to join his society, should be willing to scarifice his all. For that end he organised a
society, and created the institution of succession to enable his successors to develop and mature the Panth.
Finally, it is this society which the Tenth Guru created as the Khalsa, again giving the call for total sacrifice,
and breaking completely with the earlier religious systems, traditions, customs, etc. Hence it is sheer
ignorance of Oberoi to relate Guru Granth Sahib and its system to something of the kind of Christian
fundamentalism in order to create a prejudice in the minds of those who have no knowledge of Sikhism.
Guru Granth Sahib or its ideology can be summed up as was done by Guru Nanak thus : Give up egoism
and live a life of love, virtue, equality and justice. Accordingly there is no obscurantism or pluralism in the
ideology of Guru Nanak. To make such a statement is to display gross ignorance of the basic ideology of
Guru Nanak. As to the min-piri doctrine, it is the fundamental of Guru Nanak’s thesis to combine the
empirical life with the spiritual life of man. It is the same principle as was accepted by Moses and Prophet
Mohammad, both of whom were simultaneously religious and political leaders.
As to the Nirankaris, he has again completely misrepresented the position either out of ignorance or
otherwise. The Nirankaris are neither a Sikh sect nor a break-away group, nor do the Nirankaris themselves
make any claim to be Sikhs. The clash between the Nirankaris and the Bhindrawale group might well have
been a created problem in order to sidetrack the Sikh political struggle for its rights. In any case, such a
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
conflict could be between the two ideologies. Further, it is a mis-statement that the death of Gurbachan
Singh was followed by mass killings in the Punjab. Nothing of the kind happened and Oberoi has not given
any evidence to support this unfounded statement. The alleged clash had nothing to do with the political
problems of Punjab and the issues involved therein. A minor clash between two communities can hardly be a
reason for denying autonomy to a state.
Oberoi has also incongruously introduced the point of the Green Revolution, which is
chronologically a baseless assertion. The Sikh agitation for Punjabi Suba and autonomous status, is a political
issue of pre-Independence days and even the demand of Punjabi Suba and its autonomy arose in the life of
Sardar Patel. Long before the Green Revolution, the agitation for the Suba had started. Over fifty thousand
went to jail and suffered imprisonment and other hardships. All this happened before the onset of the Green
Revolution. As every student of Punjab agriculture is aware, the first import of high yielding seeds from
Mexcio took place in 1966, and the impact of the Green Revolution was not felt before the mid seventies. By
that time the agitation for Sikh demands including the fasts of Sant Fateh Singh and Darshan Singh
Pheruman, as also the death of the latter, had taken place. Second, the occurrence of the Green Revolution
in Punjab is an accomplished fact. But the important question is why it took place in the North West corner
of India among the rural Sikhs and not anywhere else in India or Asia, which had been deficient in food. It is
the life-affirming ideology of Sikhism that is the sole explanation for it as has been explained by Upinderjit
Kaur in her publication. Oberoi’s difficulty appears to be his complete ignorance of the spirituo-empirical life
combination or the mri-piri system of Guru Granth Sahib. That is why he seems to be beating about the
bush. As to the subdivision of holdings, he has again made a contradiction. Subdivison is a natural
consequence of the system of succession. The Green Revolution has not in any way accentuated it, but it has
made small holdings more productive and life sustaining than before. Higher yields and greater production
have relieved the economic situation, and this is supported by no less a person than Subramaniam, the
Agriculture Minister of India.
Oberoi has harped a lot on modernity and secularism, and has only displayed an ignorance of the
broad forces that are involved in the current century. It is Toynbee, who laments that for the last three
hundred years religion has been driven out of the cultural life of man and instead parochialism of the worship
of the national state as a goddess has started. He also laments that the Western technologist has lost his self-
confidence and is in confusion, whether the technological genii which he has released would not destroy all
human culture and whether his “professional success may not have been a social and moral disaster.” For
him “the great world religions have been replaced in modern times by three post-Christian ideologies —
nationalism, communism and individualism. All three are equally impersonal and dehumanising.” Similarly,
Pierard believes “Secularism in the nineteenth century aided by Marxism, Darwinism and Positivism chipped
away the Christian underpinning of Western thought.” This thinking considers that secularism and
nationalism eventually will give rise to militarism, imperialism, racism and despotism. The history of the
current century hardly seems to suggest that secularism leads to cultural or moral progress. In fact, the
indications, both historical and current, seem to be quite different. For, in Europe and the USSR millions
were destroyed by Hitler and Stalin both of whom were secularists without any belief in religion. It is in this
context that the American Churches have raised the voice that secularism is a major danger to life and that
Christianity should co-operate with other religions in order to avoid the present decline in moral values of
our culture. It is doubtful, whether Hegel, as Oberoi suggests, can be associated with the thinking of divorce
between religion and politics. But whatever be his belief, he is certainly associated with German militarism
and is considered to be the precursor of Kaiser, Hitler and despotism. In fact it is the post modern thinking
of men like Huston Smith!* that suggests the recognition of the role of religion against the limitation and
potential harm that is contained in the power-over-nature approach to life that governs much of our modern
culture. This philosophy appears to lead towards “only a dead end; annihilation of mythology, religion, all
value system, all hope.”
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
REFERENCES
1. Harjot Oberoi: S’kb Fundamentalism: Ways of Turning Things Over. Paper presented at the annual
Meeting of the American Academy of Religion, Anaheim; November, 1989.
2. Popular Saints, Goddesses and Village Sacred Sites: Re-reading Sikh Experience in the Nineteenth Century.
Read at Conference held at Berkeley, USA, Feb., 1987.
Young India, Bombay, March, 1931.
The Statesman, Calcutta, July 7, 1946.
Kapur Singh : Sachi Sakhi, Navyug Publishers, 1973, pp. 32-33.
Young India, Bombay, March 19, 1931.
Duggal, Devinder Singh : The Truth about the Sikhs, Amritsar, N.D., page 14.
The Council of Sikh Affairs, Chandigarh : The Anguish of Punjab: Sikhs Demand Justice, N.D.,
page 5.
9. Dhillon, G.S: Researches in Sikh Religion and History, Chandigarh, 1989, page 134-135.
10. IMustarted Weekly of India, Jane 10-16, 1984: The Man Everyone Loves to Hate.
11. Machiavelli, Niccolo : The Prince, page 46, Oxford University Press; Reprint, A Mentor Book :
New Amercian Library; A Division of Penguin Books, USA, New York, Revised Trans. 1935.
12. Dhillon, G.S. : Researches in Sikh Religion and History, op. cit., pp. 114-115.
13. The Council of Sikh Affairs; Chandigarh : Punjab River Waters Dispute, page 12.
14. Los Angeles Times, LA (USA), Feb., 1988, pages 1 and 32.
15. The Tribune, Chandigarh, dated Aug. 3, 1990.
16. Govt. of India : The Report of the Narmada Water Dispute Tribunal, Vol. I, pages 25, 26 and
30, New Delhi, 1930.
17. Fernandes, G., Rly Minister, Govt. of India.
18. Huston Smith : Beyond the Post-Modern Mind, The Theosophical Publishing House, Wheaton (IID),
USA, A Quest Book, 1985.
OO ION, OT 08
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
35
SIKH MILITANCY AND THE jaTs*
JAGJIT SINGH
Some historians have expressed the view that the initiation and development of militarization within
the Sikh movement was due to the cultural patterns and traits of the Jats who joined it in large numbers. We
shall here discuss this theory (which we label as Jat Theory for the sake of brief reference to it), and show that
it is based on factually wrong assumptions and premises. For instance, there is no data to infer that the Jats
were the predominant element among the Sikhs when Guru Hargobind militarized the movement, or in the
battles of Guru Gobind Singh and those of Banda. Rather, all the available historical evidence points to the
contrary. To argue that, “a comparatively light representation in a list of prominent members does not
necessarily imply a corresponding proportion of the actual adherants”’,! indicates how unsure the advocates of
the Jat Theory themselves are about the factual basis of their main premise. Even this is a presumption that
the Jats were the only people who bore arms, in case the population was not disarmed, and the Khatris and
the castes lower than the Jats did not. Anyway, we are here attempting to draw attention to those substantive
factors which the protagonists of the Jat Theory blackout, but which make it quite clear that it was the Sikh
ideology, and not Jat constituency of the Panth, that was responsible for the initiation and development of
Sikh militancy. Rather, the question whether or not the Jats were the dominant partners in the Panth is
irrelevant; because, without the Sikh ideology, the Sikh social and political revolution would not have
materialized even if the Panth had been composed entirely of Jats, and been left to their own native character
and mores.
1. REVOLUTIONARY AND NON-REVOLUTIONARY MOVEMENTS
As the differences between revolutionary and non-revolutionary movements are “qualitative, marked
by differences in kind, not just in amount,”? the militancy of the Sikh movement should not be confused with
that of non-revolutionary movements, or for that matter with that of such a period of this movement itself.
It is not just militancy that leads to a revolution. For this reason, the significance of the militancy of a mass
movement cannot be understood without relating it to the purpose it wants to achieve. Mere elan or
magnitude of the militancy of a movement, howsoever intense, should not obscure the vital condition as to
distinction whether or not it is yoked to serve a revolutionary purpose. “Thus, though in terms of their
physical quality, there is little to choose between the burning of Newgate prison in 1780 and the fall of the
Bastille in 1789, in terms of historical significance it is abundantly clear that the latter was a revolutionary act
and the former was not.’?
Near at home, there are few instances in world history which compare with the reckless courage
shown by Rajput men and women who committed the suicidal Jobars, in thousands at a time, just to preserve
Rajput honour and polity. The most successful Hindu revolt against Muslim domination was that of the
Marathas, who re-conquered a major part of the country; but their militancy was geared mainly to feudal
ends, and, at its best, to some measure of Maratha-cum-Hindu nationalism allied to social reaction.4
At a later period, the Pindars overran the country for sheer loot a number of times; but would on
each occasion retire to their homes to indulge in sensuous pleasures, and never bothered to carve out a
dominion of their own which was within their easy reach. Similarly, the Rajasthan Jats showed exemplary
courage and tenacity in defending the Bharatpur fort against Lord Lake, but their militancy either ended, like
that of the Satnamis, in sporadic revolts, under Gokala and Raja Ram, against the Mughals, or later served the
feudal-cum-dynastic objectives of the Bharatpur principality. None of these militant enterprises even
conceive of revolutionary objectives; because non-revolutionary movements are “virtual prisoners of the
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
reigning set of social values, and, therefore, cannot mount a full-scale attack on the institutional systems of
stratification that are both cause and effect of these values.’
In addition to the “Jat cultural patterns”, the second major factor assumed to have prompted a
military response in the Sikh movement is the “economic problems.” Here, again, the revolutionary character
of the Sikh militancy is lost sight of. It is “wrong to assume that the latent conflict produced by the various
modes of social stratification will automatically reach revolutionary proportions.”° Trotsky writes : “In reality,
the mere existence of privation is not enough to cause an insurrection; if it were, the masses would always be
in revolt’? There were always in the French and Russian societies sub-marginally poor people, but the
important thing to note is that French history and Russian history are filled with famines, plagues, bad
harvests, many of which were accompanied by sporadic rioting, but by only one revolution.’
So in India, there was only one plebeian political revolution, the Sikh Revolution; and, quality-wise, it
was no less significant. Whereas, none of the English, American or French revolutions “substituted a brand-
new ruling class for the old one, at least not unless one thinks of class without bothering about the human
beings, who make up the class.”? “The lowest of low in Indian estimation” shared political power under
Banda,!° and none higher than the Jats (on the border-line of Vaishyas and Sudras), carpenters (Sudras), and
distillers (on the border-line of Sudras and outcastes) did so in the Mzés/ period. Other Indian peasants,
particularly the Jats, were no less subject to the kind of economic, political or social stresses that the Jats of
the Sikh tract were, but none of them even conceived, much less attempted, to achieve revolutionary
objectives. The nearest approach to a revolutionary movement were the Jat uprisings under Gokala and Raja
Ram, and the Satnami revolt, but, these partook the character of sporadic revolts. The fact is that revolutions
do not just happen; they are made. And, there are a number of factors which contribute to the making of a
revolution, of which we will consider here briefly a few important ones.
2. GOAL, PURPOSE OR STAKES AND IDEOLOGY
A revolution, by its very definition, has to have a stake no less than that of abolishing, or radically
reconstructing, one or more of the traditional systems of stratification, based on class, status, or power,!! in
favour of the downtrodden. The last qualification is an overriding one, since any change in the reverse
direction becomes counter-revolutionary. As the whole dynamics of a revolutionary movement revolves
around its humanitarian motivation and stakes, the foremost question to be probed is the ideological source
of such a motivation. About the Sikh ideological stand on this vital issue, there is no ambiguity.
Guru Nanak declared : “Call everyone exalted; let no one appear to thee low.”!? He laid down
specifically : “O unwise, be not proud of thy caste. For, a myriad errors flow out of this pride’’,!> and
identified himself with the lowliest of the low castes. “There are lower castes among the low castes and some
absolutely low. Nanak seeketh their company; what hath he to do with the high ones. For, where the lowly
are cated for, there is Thine (God’s) Benediction and Grace.” 4
The Guru did away with not only ‘caste-status’ consciousness, but also with the status consciousness
gaps of every kind. “To treat the king and the pauper on equal footing, and while greeting to touch the feet
of the other (Le., to regard oneself humble as compared to others) was made the rule of conduct;’”!5 because,
“He who thinks himself to be the lowest of the lowly; Yes, he alone is the highest of the high.”! In fact, the
Gurus carried their egalitarianism to such an extent that they tried to bridge the gap between the Guru and
the disciple. When Guru Nanak appointed Angad as his successor Guru, he literally laid his head on the
latter’s feet as a mark of paying respect; and Guru Gobind Singh beseeched, with folded hands, the Five
Beloved, whom he had initiated earlier, to do him the honour of initiating him. This is the highest limit of
humility and egalitarianism to which a religious teacher can go.
This ideology was the motivative fountain-head of the Sikh socio-political revolution. The Jat
Theory suggests no alternative source of this ideological inspiration. For one thing, Jats, on their own, have
rarely shown any proclivity for idealistic or deeply religious pursuits.!’ “The only distinctive Jat cults are tribal.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
saute Among the Hindu and Sikh Jats, especially in the north-central and central districts, a form of ancestor-
worship, called Jathera, is common.”!® It passes one’s comprehension how this ancestor-worship gave rise to
the Sikh revolutionary ideology ? Sikhism is against ancestor-worship;'? therefore, Jathera worship could not
be reconciled with it.
Nor can the Jat social egalitarianism be equated with the Sikh idea of brotherhood. Jats partake some
of the traits of both a tribe and a caste. Their social equality is tribal, confined to their Jat bhaichara, and does
not extend to castes lower than them. They, whether Hindu, Muslim or Sikh, dominated and exploited the
Sudras and the outcastes in their own villages.2? How did such tribal social exclusiveness square up with or
lead to the brotherhood of the Khalsa (drawn from all castes including the Sudra and the outcastes) wherein
the spirit of equality was a vital principle, and a Brahmin had no higher claim to eminence than the lowest
Sudra who used to sweep his house ??!
It is only in the Jat uprisings under Gokal and Raja Ram that we find the Jats motivated by
considerations higher than those of personal or tribal gain. Even these outbursts were not based on Jat traits
or sentiments, but were born of the wrath directed against the destruction by the Mughals of Hindu temples
at Mathura, which outraged the local religious feelings in particular. In any case, these were by no means
revolutionary movements. Because, “The essence of revolt is angry, violent expression of the refusal of an
individual or group to continue in its present condition....Revolt lives in the immediate; it is in the immediate
that it needs someone accountable. ...... 22 “Tt is the very concreteness and specificity of revolt that prevents
it from calling the whole social order in question. It is concerned with men and measures, not with
fundamental institution. That is what separates it from revolution.” Neither these Jats in revolt challenged
the caste social order, nor did they conceive of capturing political power for the masses. On the contrary, a
little later they came in handy to Churaman and Suraj Mal, who exploited their restiveness to build the feudal
and dynastic principality of Bharatpur.
In short, what the Jat Theory avoids to tackle is the most important issue that mere militancy of any
kind, or extreme discontent alone based on economic or social disparities, is not enough to produce a
revolution. What is missing is some extra-push of a revolutionary ideology : “a dynamic of a genuinely
spiritual and religious kind.”*4 “While ideology is not the whole of revolution, it is a characteristic and a partly
autonomous part of it.’ It is the revolutionary ideology that infuses a sense of a universally valid
humanitarian purpose and direction to the revoltuionary movement. Revolts and other non-revolutionary
upheavels also have some sort of purpose in view, but “the limited stakes and backward glance of revolt are
associated with its low level of ideology.”’6
It is obvious that the Sikh revolutionary motivation could not be born of Jathera worship or of the
tribal equality of the Jats, who on their own, never challenged or opted out of the caste society. Its
mainspring was the Sikh view of religion : “Religion consisteth not in mere words; he who looks upon all
men as equals is religious.”’ It is this inspiration which alone could unite into a genuine brotherhood of the
Khalsa those disparate elements of the caste (drawn from Brahmins and Khatris down to the untouchables),
separated by the three tendencies of repulsion, hierarchy and hereditary specialization.”?* The abolition or
submergence of natrow sectional interests and sentiments takes place on a mass scale only if these are
displaced or overshadowed by shared loyalty to a higher cause. How could the proselytes drawn from
disparate, even hostile, castes be welded into the Sikh Panth and the Khalsa, with a feeling of oneness and
brotherhood, if not by the Sikh faith ? It could not be done on the basis of the tribal and caste loyalties and
motes of the Jats.
While ideology is not the whole of revolution, one finds that its other main features also hinge on its
ideology, in one form or the other; at least it is so in the case of the Sikh revolutionary movement. Not only
have these features of Sikh militancy no link with Jat traits, but they are also unique when considered in the
Indian context as a whole. The foremost unique feature is that all other anti-caste movements remained
pacific, and not even one conceived of capturing political power by the masses.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
3. IDEOLOGY AND LEADERSHIP
The second pre-requisite of a revolution is leadership committed and devoted to its revolutionary
goal. As a revolution cannot be conceived without a humanitarian goal, so it cannot be accomplished without
a leadership committed and devoted to that ideology. It is the leadership which maintains the purpose and
direction of a movement; and leadership and co-ordination form two related aspects of any directed action.
Because a revolution has to have a revolutionary goal and direction, it is seldom the product of spontaneous
mass upsurge. The risings of the peasants under Gokala and Raja Ram, and that of the Satnamis, which
attracted so much attention, illustrate this point. Collective spontaneity is, moreover, not really capable of
devising specific forms of revolutionary organization.?? Without leadership, a revolutionary situation remains
an unrealized potential.
It, is, therefore, obvious that the leaders of a revolutionary movement must be conscious of their
mission and devoted to it. “Doctrine must subdue spontaneity”, wrote Lenin.*” “What seems to typify a
revolution in contrast to revolt is the phenomenon of verbalization and conceptualization in advance it is not
a random venture.” ...... “In addition to the ideological factor, revolution implies an orientation toward
organization and institutionalization.””*!
The role of leadership thus provided another major point of difference between revolutionary and
non-revolutionary movements. “It is not that revolts are leaderless, while revolutions are led. All collective
violence involves leaders of some sort. The question is rather the role played by the leadership. The leaders
of revolts are often skilled tacticians with occasional charismatic qualities. Yet, they are not charged with the
inspiration of a higher ideal, which only a clear-cut ideology can provide. The leaders of revolts, therefore,
continue to move within a groove determined by their narrow objectives. Without guidelines of an ideology,
they cannot see beyond their limited horizons and evolve plans for accomplishing some higher mission.’’*2
The leaders of a revolution, on the other hand, are ideologically oriented. In fact, they are the products of an
ideology. This was one of the reasons why at the time of initiation into the Khalsa, the entrants were made to
take solemn vows of Dharam Nash, Kul Nash, etc., which cut at the roots of the caste ideology and society.
The Sikh militancy was thus wedded to the overthrow of the caste order, in addition to capturing political
power for the masses. The Khalsa carried on a life and death guerilla warfare for 30 years, and guerilla
warfare “has been ideological from the very outset.”*? A guerilla is “an intensely motivated and highly
dedicated soldier who has a keen sense of issues at stake and understands the nature of war he is fighting.
His strength lies inside, in the moral considerations, which ‘make three-fourths of him.”’*4+ And, the final
measure of the depth of convictions is martyrdom. The Sikh movement was virtually crushed a number of
times,*> but each time, like the proverbial phoenix, it rose from its ashes.*° The only thing that sustained the
Khalsa was their religious faith. The English ambassadors in Delhi at the time reported to their head that
about 750 prisoners were executed alongwith Banda. “It is not a little remarkable with what patience they
undergo their fate, and to the last it has not been found that one apostatized from his new found faith.*7
Forster writes, “Such was the keen spirit that animated the persecution, such was the success of the
exertions, that the name of a stque (Sikh) no longer existed in the Mughal dominion. Those who still adhered
to the tenets of Nawoch, either fled into the mountains at the head of the Punjab, or cut off their hair, and
exteriorily renounced the profession of their religion.”38 Who were the steel-frame of the Khalsa struggle ?
Those who stuck to their faith and paid a heavy price for it, or those who ‘cut off their hair ?’? Like the
charged (ions) and uncharged atoms of the same element, there were Jats and Jats. Those who were charged
by the Sikh ideology played a magnificent role in the Sikh movement, but those who were not, either stayed
back or renounced it in adverse circumstances. It is not the Jat traits that changed the character of the Sikh
movement; it is the Sikh ideology that transformed the Jats who joined it. Latif writes : “It is acknowledged
on all hands that the conversion of a band of undisciplined Jats (given to rapine and plunder or to agricultural
pursuits) into a body of conquerors and a political corporation, was entirely due to the genius of Govind,
whose history is closely interwoven with that of the Sikhs as a nation.’”?
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
It has to be made clear that we ate concerned only with the Sikh revolutionary movement; because,
the fallacy of those, who argue that the militarization of the Sikh movement was initiated and reinforced by
the influx into it of a large number of Jats, arises in no small measure from their failure to distinguish between
the revolutionary and post-revolutionary phases of the movement. They seem to judge the former in the light
of the latter. There is a world of difference between the Jats who joined the Sikh movement, under the
inspiration of the Sikh ideology and made an outstanding contribution to its struggle, and those who did not;
or between the behaviour patterns of the same group, whether Jat or non-Jat, when, at different periods, it
had the ideological inspiration and when it lost it. We have purposely quoted, here and there, eminent
scholars of political science to substantiate our argument that the differences between the characteristics of
revolutionary and non-revolutionary movements (and for that matter between those of the two such phases
of the same movement) “are qualitative, marked by differences in kind, not just in amount.’4? In the
revolutionary phase of a movement, the primary and dominant factor is its ideological content and not its
ethnic composition. Without the ideological surcharge, inspiration and direction, how helpless or rudderless
the peasants the world over, or the Jats in India (or for that matter the other downtrodden sections of
society), have been, is writ large on the pages of history.
It has been a consistent fact of history that none of the revolutions have been initiated or led by the
downtrodden themselves in whose favour the abolition or reconstruction of stratification took place. The
French Revolution formally liberated the peasants from feudalism, but it was the middleclass which
dominated the revolution, and the peasantry played only a secondary role limited to localized action against
landlords. One of the main reasons for the failure of the German Peasant Wars, stated by Engels, is that
these peasants were not indoctrinated enough, with the result that the bulk of the peasants were always ready
to come to terms with the lords who exploited this weakness of theirs,*! and were also readily demoralized
when they met a strong resistance or a reverse. About the Russian Revolution, Lenin observes : “While
workers left to their own devices could only develop trade union consciousness and peasants only petty
bourgeois demands for land, it would be the guiding intellectuals who would lead the revolution on behalf of
the workers and the peasants.” Marx likens the peasants to a bag of potatoes. All the leaders of the Chinese
Communist Party, which led the Communist Revolution in China, had higher education and most of them
had studied abroad.4 Troong Chinh points out that the great majority of the cadres and the militants in the
Communist Party of the revolutionary period of Vietnam originated in the petty bourgeoisie.* Similarly, the
Cuban Revolution was a great gamble by a group of determined, educated revolutionaries which paid off.“
Therefore, what is crucial to movements, besides the role of ideology, is initiative and leadership. It
is the existence of a revolutionary purpose and direction, which ideology and leadership provide, that
distinguishes a revolution from a mere riot or revolt. A very glaring example, which clarifies the distinction
between revolution and revolt, is the well-known rebellion of the Gladiators. The capital of Rome lay at their
feet, but they did not occupy it because they did not know what to do with it. As regards peasants, Eric
R.Wolf gives weighty reasons for his conclusion that, “The peasant is especially handicapped in passing from
passive recognition of wrongs to political participation as a means of setting them right.’”4” The Jats form the
majority in Sindh, and are approximately equal to the number of Rajputs in Bikaner, Jaiselmer and Marwar.
They are three times more than the Rajputs in the Punjab (inclusive that of Pakistan), yet only fragmentary
notices of the Jats occur in the accounts of Mohammadan historians, whereas the pages of Indian history are
full of Rajput exploits. It could only be because the Jats were politically inconsequential.
It has got, therefore, to be explained : how the Jats of the Punjab, who dominated and exploited the
Sudras and the outcastes in their own villages,** initiated and developed the militarization of a movement,
whose political stake, as made explicit by Guru Hargobind to Samarath Ramdas, was to protect the poor; a
movement which did not serve sectional interests, Jat or non-Jat; a movement which was not clannish,
regional, feudal or dynastic; a movement which strove to capture political power by the Khalsa, a militant
brotherhood drawn from all castes without discrimination ? It was for this purpose that the Guru Panth was
placed subordinate to Guru Granth Sahib. How does all this fit in with the tribal egalitarianism of the Jats ?
The problem is not as simple as that of merely identifying the ethnic composition and traits of the
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
participants. Unless it is established, to what extent, and in what manner, the Jat character and mores
moulded the ideology, leadership and organization of the Sikh revolutionary movement to their own pattern,
it leads nowhere. Because, as we know, the Sikh ideology was laid down by Guru Nanak and never changed
even by the succeeding Gurus. The leadership of the movement remained in the Gurus’ hands during their
lifetimes, devolving afterwards on the whole Panth (Guru Panth) as a corporate body. And, the organizational
institutions of the Panth like sangat, Khalsa, Panj Piaras, Dals and Sarbat Khalsa, etc., do not bear the remotest
resemblance to the Jat gotras and Khaps.
4. OTHER FEATURES
Two other features of a revolutionary movement, though related to the roles that ideology and
leadership play, are mentioned here separately, because these serve to distinguish it from non-revolutionary
upheavals.
“Revolution begins with an idea. It is specifically the infusion of an idea into a historical situation,
whereas revolt is simply a movement leading from individual experience to an idea.”4? “A revolt does not
have any idea (pensee) at the origin; it is visceral, immediate. A revolution implies a doctrine, a project, some
kind of theory. ...... An idea may be expressed occasionally in the course of revolt, but is always incidental
and emerges from the developing revolt itself.’”>°
The Sikh movement began with an ideal. To be precise, Sikh humanitarianism was born of the deep
religious experience of the founder guru, Guru Nanak, whose very first expression of his experience was that,
“There is no Hindu, no Mussalman” (i.e., humanity is one). Further, as already seen, he identified himself
with the lowest of the low castes.
Secondly, a revolutionary movement is not a chance development or a sporadic phenomenon. Not
only has it a definite revolutionary goal or purpose, but it is a sustained movement with a fixed direction
towards the achievement of that goal. “It is the goal of a movement that fixed its direction, and it is the
existence of direction. ...... that makes revolution a political act and distinguishes it from riot.”’5'! And, it goes
without saying that it is the quality of leadership committed and devoted to the goal which maintains the
direction of a revolutionary movement. The very fact that the Sikh movement succeeded in establishing an
egalitarian casteless Panth and in capturing political power for the masses, as a result of a long period of
protracted armed struggle, is in itself a strong proof that it did not swerve from its revolutionary purpose or
direction. One major contributory factor to this end was that it was loyalty to the principles of the
movement, and not to individuals or groups, that was stressed. The Tat Khalsa did not hesitate to part
company with Banda when he showed an inclination towards deviation from the democratic principles of the
Khalsa. Even at a later period, although they were struggling for their very survival, the leaders of the mis/s
spurned Abdali’s several offers of negotiated settlement, and preferred that the Khalsa should capture
political power in its own right.
How is this loyalty to a higher mission related to Jat character and traits P And, where elsewhere, is a
similar tenacity of purpose over a long period shown by Jats, as such P
5. SIKH IDEOLOGY AND SIKH MILITANCY*
It is a historical reality that entrenched systems of stratification might be amenable to reform, but
would not surrender without an armed struggle when their very existence is at stake. As all social, political or
economic systems get entrenched, in the last analysis, on the basis of political and military sanctions, a
revolution necessarily involves an armed struggle, especially when the system concerned is sought to be
abolished within a short time. “Finally, our definition of revolution considers recourse to violence as essential
rather than accidental to it. The magnitude and the abruptness of change involved in revolution always
produces violence in some form. Revolution must be distinguished from reform, however radical, and from
long-term evolutionary development such as the so-called industrial revolution and the growth of certain
religious movements. The factor of violence helps to do this.”>?
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Thus, the militarization of the Sikh movement was not accidental, but was an essential part of its
development, because, “The issue of subordination is more pervasive than that of exploitation...5> Therefore,
to undo subordination to the Mughals, an armed struggle was indispensable. But, what made it doubly
necessary was that the goal of the Khalsa armed struggle was to capture political power for the masses
themselves.
What is, however, not generally appreciated is that the Sikh militancy was equally necessary for
bringing about the Sikh social revolution, because even a social radical change cannot have a permanent
footing without a corresponding political change. “In character and position there is nothing to distinguish
the tribes I am about to notice, save that they have never enjoyed the political importance which
distinguished the Sikh Jats under the Khalsa. ...... In the Sikh tract, the political position of the Jat was so
high that he had no wish to be called Rajput; under the hills (1.e., adjoining the Sikh tract), the status of the
Rajput is so superior that the Jat has no hope of being called Rajput.’>+ How is it that the Ramegarhias
(artisans) have come to regard themselves as peers to the Sikh Jats, and the Ahluwalias have raised their social
status to be equal to that of Khatris and Brahmins, from that of distillers in the caste society (on the border-
line of the Sudras and the outcastes), if not for having tasted political power by establishing their own *mis/ ?
It is again the legacy of the Sikh Raj that Sikhs derived from all castes are addressed by non-Sikhs as Sardars
even to this day. In fact, the probability is that the Sikhs would have been engulfed by the caste society in the
same manner as the other radical anti-caste movements were, had not the Khalsa established its political
sway. In short, it is political power which lends permanence to a radical social change;*> and political power
for a revolutionary purpose can neither be gained nor retained without armed might.
Sikh Values and Militancy : Sikh militancy was in no way linked to ethnic, sectional, regional, dynastic
ot fedual interests. While ethnic or group mores might help or retard a revolutionary process, revolutionary
movements are mothered only by revolutionary ideologies and values which clash with the prevailing unjust
social and political order. This clash was inherent in Guru Nanak’s declaration :
“The kings are like leopards, the courtiers like dogs;
Kings’s servants tear (the docile subjects) with their nails;
And, like curs, lick up all the blood they spill.’”>°
Guru Arjan wrote :
“The bear that vents his wrath on the poor of the world,
Is burnt in the fire by the Transendent Lord.’”*”
Again :
“Power swells our heads and we tyrannize over others. ...... 58
The Sikh view of religion does not permit any dichotomy in life, or of any divorce of the individual
from his society. Nor does it visualize that true religion and morality can operate unconcerned beside an
unjust social and political order; nor that spiritual freedom can co-exist with religious dictation and political
slavery. A Sikh has to take up all the challenges which are irreligious and unethical; there cannot be a neutral
position.
As stated earlier, no system of stratification has been known to yield without an armed conflict when
its very existence is at stake. Hence, an armed struggle is inherent in those values which challenge
stratification, provided those are pursued to their logical end. The modalities of this clash, of course, depend
upon the circumstances. Guru Arjun could have saved his life by allowing his followers to pay the fine
imposed on him, but he preferred, as he told Saint Mian Mir, to suffer torture and death rather than forsake a
principle.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Ahimsa : "This clash of values with the status-quo was inherent also in Christianity when Christ
declared that a rich man could not enter heaven, and in Buddhism when it discarded status based on birth.
But, the odium that somehow came to be attached to the use of force even for a just and noble cause proved
a great hurdle in their way to taking to the revolutionary path. Sikhism had no such problem, because Guru
Nanak, in a long hymn, emphasizes that no life process or animal life is possible without the use of flesh in
one form or the other. He points out the fallacy of those who make a fetish of eating meat, but have no
scruples in ‘devouring’ (exploiting) men.? God is : “Destroyer of the tyrant and benefactor of the
downtrodden,”
Min-Piri: It was Guru Arjun who instructed Guru Hargobind to take up arms when he felt that that
was the only alternative to surrendering faith. The very first act of Guru Hargobind, when he initiated the
militarization of the Sikhs, was to don two swords, which he specifically called of miri and piri, one
symbolizing temporal authority and the other religious authority. In this manner, Sikh militancy began in
pursuance of the concept of combining temporal and religious realms. At that very time two separate flags
were also hoisted, side by side, to emphasise the confluence of the two principles. It was, again Guru
Hargobind who explained to Samarath Ramdas (believed to be Shivaji’s preceptor) that his sword was meant
‘for the protection of the poor !*! This is how the seeds of the Sikh military struggle were sown. The naming
of the headquarters of the Sikh militant movement as Akal Takht (the throne of God), too, meant that Sikh
militancy was from its very inception linked to an eternal (44a/) universal principle and a moral cause. The
creation of the Khalsa was a continuation of the ideological line of mir-piri, and “Wabeguru ji ka Khalsa and
Waheguru ji ki Fateh” was a continuation of the concept of Akal Takht. In this manner, the Sikh revolutionary
militancy was wedded all along to an eternal principle embodying a humanitarian cause.
Soldier-Saints : "The use of force becomes essential rather than accidental to a revolution, but
misdirected and uncontrolled violence tends to destroy the community itself. As Camus has put it :
“Absolute non-violence is negative basis of slavery and its acts of violence; systematic violence positively
destroys the living community and the existence we receive from it. To be fruitful, these two ideas must
establish their limits.”
Guru Gobind Singh wrote to Aurangzeb, ‘when other means fail it is legitimate to have recourse to
the sword.’® Qazi Nurud-Din testifies that the Sikhs would not strike at an enemy who laid down arms or
fled from the battlefield.“* The Mohammadan author of Fatuhat Nama-i-Samdi corroborates that, “if a woman
falls into their hands (i.e., of the Khalsa), they look upon her as their mother.’ Polier writes of the ms/
period that, “it is true they seldom kill in cold blood or make slaves.’ Griffin opines that, “There are few
stories in Sikh history of outrage to women and torture to men such as stain the pages of Indian history..”°
It is not at all suggested that the Sikh movement achieved or maintained that desired optimum
balance. In fact, it is problematical whether or not humanity would be able to achieve such a target in the
forseeable future. What is pertinent here is that : (i) the Sikh movement made a serious effort in this
direction, even in the face of barbaric tortures to which they were subjected by the Mughals; (11) this standard
of Sikh conduct was not incidental. During their struggle, the Sikhs made the maintenance of ethical
standards an integral part of their militant programme; because, the Gurus had laid down the ideal: “To
exercise forbearance in the midst of power; to be humble in the midst of honour;’® (ii) the Sikh conduct as
exhibited, could not be born of the mores of Jats who were given to ‘rapine and plunder’, and who were
notoriously lax in those very qualities® for which the Qazi and others have praised the Sikhs.
6. CONCLUSION
The significance of the militancy of any mass movement cannot be grasped by divorcing it from the
purpose to which it is yoked; but, the Jat Theory ignores altogether the motivational gap between an
ideological struggle and the one for power, or the demarcation between the behaviour of the same individuals
ot groups, when they are charged and when not charged by a religio-moral ideology. The Jat Theory does not
even attempt to explain how the prowess of Jats, left to their tribal mores, led to the Sikh political revolution
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
in which political power was shared by Sudras and distillers; or how Jat cultural traits gave rise to such
concepts as Sache Patshah, Min-Pin, Akal Takht, Waheguru ji ka Khalsa and Fateh ? Nor does it explain as to
what was the need of creating the Khalsa at all. Unless these questions, and other related ones, are answered,
no conclusion would be logical or valid.
Brinton, who has studied in depth the English, American, French and Russian revolutions, has
shown that revolutionary movements, while they last, rise above the mundane interests and normal mores of
the participants.” Therefore, the postulate “that if a distinctive social group secures dominant status within a
particular society it will inevitably exercise upon that society an influence which reflects its own mores,’”’! is
not valid for the revolutionary period of the Sikh movement atleast. As it is accepted that “the sanctified will
of the Guru was beyond challenge,’’? why could the Sikh ideology and faith not be the driving force of the
Sikh struggle and movement in following the course chartered for them by the Guru ? In fact, Le Bon has
shown that: “Among the most important factors of history one was predominant. ...... the factor of
belief.”
REFERENCES
1. E. Schomer and W.H. McLeod : The Saints, p. 240.
2. Mark N. Hagopian : The Phenomenon of Revolution, p. 10.
3. Ellul, Jacques : Autopsy of Revolution, pp. 43-44.
4. “It is recorded that under the rule of the Marathas and the Peshwas, the Mahars and Mongs were
not allowed within the gates of Poona after 3 p.m. and before 9 a.m. ......” (Ghurye, G.S.: Caste ¢» Race in
India, p. 11).
5. Hagopian: op. cit., pp. 10-11.
6. Ibid., p. 99.
7. Quoted by Brinton, Crane: The Anatomy of Revolution, p. 34.
8. Ibid., p. 34.
9. Ibid., p. 270.
10. Irvine, William : Later Mughals, 1, pp. 98-99.
11. Hagopian: op. cit., pp. 10-11.
12. Macauliffe, Max Arthur: The Sikb Religion, I, p. 274.
13. Guru Granth Sahib: p. 1128.
14. Ibid., p. 15.
15. Bhai Gurdas: Var One, Pauries 23, 25, Var 23, Pauri 20.
16. Guru Granth Sahib: p. 266.
17. Crooke, W.: The N.W. Provinces of India, etc., p. 93; Jallandur Distt. Gazetteer (1904), part A, p.
721; Gurgaon Distt: Gazetteer (1883-4), p. 41.
18. Rose, H.A.: A Glossary of Tribes, etc., I. p. 371.
19. Guru Granth Sahib: p. 332.
20. Crook, W. : op. cit. pp. 206, 244; Settlement Report, Ludhiana Distt. (1978-83); Census Report
(1891), p. 202; Rose, HI, p.75.
21. Malcolm, Brigadier General : Asiatic Researches (1812), pp. 219, 292.
22. Ellul, Jacques : Awstopsy of Revolution, p. 27.
23. Hagopian: op. cit., pp. 10-11.
24. Edwards, L.P.: The Natural History of Revolution, p. 90.
25. Hagopian: op. cit., p. 280.
26. Ibid., p. 12.
27. Macauliffe, Max Arthur: op. cit. 1, p. 60.
28. Celestin Bongle: Essays on the Caste System (trans. D.F. Peacock), p. 9.
29. Hagopian : op. cit., p. 2.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
30. Quoted by Ellul: op. cit., p. 124.
31. Ellul: op. cit., pp. 47, 49.
32. Hagopian: op. cit., pp. 12-13.
33. Malik Arjan Das : Az Indian Guerilla War, pp. 2-3.
34. Ibid., p. 3.
35. Calendar of Persian Correspondence, Vol. II, p. 85; Malcolm : op. cit., p. 246; Forster, I, pp. 312-3;
Polier, Panjab Past ¢ Present, Oct. 1970, p. 237.
36. Malcolm: op.cit. (1812), pp. 246-7,
37. Ganda Singh : Early European Accounts of the Sikhs, p. 188.
38. Forster, George : A Journey from Bengal to England, Vol. 1, pp. 312-13.
39. Syed Muhammad Latif: Hestory of the Punjab, p. 271.
40. Hagopian: op. cit., p. 10; Brinton, Chap. VII.
41. Frederic Engels : The Peasant War in Germany, pp. 101, 102, 129.
42. Ibid., pp. 100-101, 105-6, 108.
43. Quoted by Eric R. Wolf: Peasant Wars of the Twentieth Century, p. 83.
44. Ibid., p. 150.
45. Ibid., p. 185.
46. Ibid., p. 269.
47. Ibid., pp. 289-90.
48. Crooke, W.: op. cit., pp. 206, 244; Census Report (1891), p. 202; Rose, II, p. 75.
49. Camus, Albert: The Rebel, p. 77.
50. Ellul: op. cit., pp. 43-44.
51. Peter Calvert : A Study of Revolution, p. 97.
52. Hagopian: op. cit., p. 3.
53. Bernard de Jouvenal cited by Ellul: op. cit., p. 108.
54. Ibbetson, Sir Denzil : Punjab Castes, sec 437.
55. Hagopian: op. cit., p. 51.
56. Guru Granth Sahib: op. cit., p. 1288.
57. Ibid., p. 199.
58. Ibid., p. 255.
59. Ibid., pp. 1289-90.
60. Jap.
61. Ganda Singh: The Panjab Past ¢& Present (April 1979), pp. 240-42.
62. Camus: op. cit., p. 255.
63. Zafarnama.
64. Jangnamah, cited by Hari Ram Gupta: History of the Sikhs, I, p. 290.
65. Cited by Gurbax Singh : Punjab History Conference Proceedings (Sept. 1972), p. 50.
66. Ganda Singh : Early European Accounts of the Sikhs, p. 197.
67. Griffin, Lepel: Rajas of the Punjab, p. 17.
68. Guru Granth Sahib: p. 85.
69. Ibbetson : Punjab Castes, sec. 424; Gazetteer of Lahore Distt. (1883-84), pp. 66-68.
70. Brinton: op. cit., Chapter VII;
71. E.Schomer and W.H. McLeod : op. cit. p. 242.
72. Ibid., p. 244.
73. Le Bon Gustave: The Psychology of Revolution, p. 14.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
36
SIKHISM AND TEMPORAL AUTHORITY
KHARAK SINGH
Sikhism is a whole-life religion laying emphasis on discharging one’s socio-moral responsibilities as a
part of the spiritual progress of the individual. Since the former cannot be performed without, at times,
confrontation with an unjust termporal authority, such activity and pursuits have always been considered a
legitimate and vital function of a Sikh and Sikh society. In short, Sikhism is a miri-piri or a sant-sipahi religious
system. This conviction is so deep-rooted among the masses, that any argument in its support or justification
would appear wholly superfluous. This is evidenced and clear from the following couplet which is a part of
the litany sung by every Sikh at all congregational prayers for the last three centuries :
“Raj Karega Khalsa, aki rahe na koe;
Khwar hoe sabh milenge, bache sharan jo hoe.””!
This slogan has constantly reminded the followers of the Gurus of their social commitment, and has
inspired Sikhs all through their history to struggle against injustice and oppression, and to make extreme
sacrifices, unparalleled in history for the cause of bringing about a humanitarian socio-political order, based
on equality and justice, as preached by the Gurus.
Yet, occasionally a voice to the contrary is heard. From a non-Sikh, it could be understood, and even
partly appreciated as an expression of concern over the seeming threat to his sovereignty, although, as would
be explained later, it cannot be justified. But, when the objection issues from a member of the Sikh
community itself, it questions the very philosophy of Sikhism, expressed through the doctrine of miri-pini,
preached by Guru Nanak, symbolised by Guru Hargobind in two swords, and enjoined upon the Khalsa as a
creed to be practised, by the Tenth Master. The opposition to investing the Khalsa with any degree of
temporal involvement, springs from the alleged desire of the critics to prevent the “pure stream of religion”
from entering into the “muddy waters of politics”, borrowing the phrases from Jadu Nath Sarcar. There are a
large number of hymns in the Guru Granth Sahib, emphasising merit of Naam, out of which they pick up a
few, and misinterpret them to support their stand. They forget that Sikhism is not a personal salvation
religion, and that, apart from Naam simran, Gurbani lays repeated stress on deeds and service to mankind. A
few isolated incidents from history are sometimes picked up to show that the Gurus never approved of
setting up a state for their followers. It is further argued that since the Gurus did not carve out any empire
for themselves, they deprecated any such move for the Sikhs also. On the basis of such arguments, although
with different motives, some of the critics have even expressed the view that the couplet “Raj Karega Khalsa
shits ” should be excluded from the litany sung by every Sikh, sahjdhari or Reshdhari, ever since the creation of
the Khalsa.
Their advice is that “Politics must be insulated from religion.” Some even go to the extent of saying
that any struggle for an honourable political status for the Sikhs or to ensure their identity, is against the
teachings of the Gurus, and should, therefore, be eschewed. Impression is sought to be created that the Sikh
Gurus preached a religion of ‘interiority’ aimed at personal salvation only, and that worldly pursuits,
particularly temporal powers, are a taboo, to be abjured by the Sikhs. Such a view, unless contradicted, could
mislead an unwary reader. Hence, the following discussion.
Late Sirdar Kapur Singh, the erudite Sikh scholar, has referred to the slogan “Raj Karega Khalsa ...... :
and its opponents’ reaction in the following words :
“The startlingly tall and audacious claim, has been publicly proclaimed by the Sikh people during the
last three centuries firmly and defiantly, and it has moved many to sheer ridicule, others to resentment and
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
boiling-head anger, many Sikhs themselves to chicken-hearted, craven fear or shameless apologia, and the
political Hindus of the post-1947 euphoria. It has, almost invariably moved them to greater contempt for
those, whom they see as already in their last death-throes.’”2
Before dealing with the criticism, it seems necessary to understand the meaning of the couplet “Ra
Karega Khalsa ......”, its origin and role in history. Since it pronounces a clear-cut position on the issue of
temporal authority. Freely rendered into English, it would mean :
“The Khalsa shall exercise temporal authority,
unchallenged; Eventually everyone will accept this
position, and whoever seeks, shall get protection.”
According to tradition, the couplet first followed from the Tankhahnama of Bhai Nand Lal, whose
Granthavali, collected from his family records, was edited by Dr Ganda Singh, the eminent Sikh historian.
This Question-Answer series also records the words of Guru Gobind Singh, “Listen, Nand Lal to this truth
— the revelation of sovereign rule.” “(Same Nand Lal eho sach : Pargat Karoon apna Raf’). On the same page
after the above statement appears this couplet “Raj Karega Khalsa ...... »1 which had already become a part of
the Sikh prayer by the time of Banda Singh’s expedition to Sirhind. With this slogan, and the blessings of the
Guru that went with it, Banda Singh succeeded in the mission entrusted to him by the Guru, capturing
Sithind, and established the Khalsa Government in 1710 A.D., within two years of the demise of Guru
Gobind Singh.
Three historical episodes recorded by Rattan Singh Bhangoo in his epic work S77 Guru Panth Parkash
throw a flood of light on, and testifty to, the conviction of the Sikhs regarding bestowal of sovereignty on the
Khalsa by the Guru, and its inevitability.
1. Nawab Aslam Khan of Lahore, sent his emissary, Subegh Singh, to the Khalsa for peace, offering
Nawabship. The title was offered to Darbara Singh, whose reaction, as recorded by Bhangoo, was : “When
did we ask for it ? The Satguru has promised us Sovereign Rule. In comparison to that, the title of Nawab
appears to be a lump of clay. We claim Sovereignty, which is sure to come sooner or later. What the Satguru
has promised, is bound to materialise. The Guru’s word can never go unfulfilled, although D/ruva (the Pole
Star) or the Dhawal (the legendary Bull supporting the Earth on its horns), may shift their positions. How can
we exchange our sovereignty with this insignificant title of Nawab? Accursed be the servility.” Similarly, a
number of other Sikhs refused the title, adding, “How can sovereignty be had by begging P’3
2. Captain Murray, Charge-de-Affairs of the East India Company at Ludhiana, was obsessed with
the question of the legitimacy of the Sikh Rule. He had a dialouge with the author of the Panth Parkash
himself, which is recorded as follows :
“Murray : Explain to me how the Sikhs attained power, and who gave them sovereignty.
Answer : Sovereignty was bestowed upon the Khalsa by the True Lord.
Mutray : Who is the True Lord ?
Answer: He is Satguru Nanak.”’4
3. According to a government proclamation, in the 18th Century, Sikhs had been completely
exterminated. No Sikh had been seen for four months. When Bota Singh was noticed by some people, they
were surprised. Their remarks were : “How could it be that a Sikh has survived >” “He must be an impostor.
Sikhs have all been done to death.” “He must be a coward, a bogus Sikh who saved himself by hiding, for, a
Khalsa is one who is never afraid of death, and is ever ready to stake his head in battle.” When Bota Singh
heard this, he was dumb-founded. The remarks had stung him like a scorpion. He decided “the situation
demands sacrifice of my head in a battle. That is the only way to give a lie to the claim of the Mughals
regarding extermination of the Sikhs. Then only, will people talk of the Khalsa who have always claimed
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
sovereignty.”> What followed is history. Bhai Bota Singh challenged the Imperial authority, proclaimed the
Khalsa rule, and started collecting toll, assisted by a single Ranghreta associate. Eventually, they both laid
down their lives, fighting the Imperial forces. The thing to note in this account is the motivation of a
common Sikh during that petiod to make the supreme sacrifice in defence of the claim to sovereignty.
From the above, it is clear that during their struggle with the Mughal Rulers, in the eighteenth
century, the Sikhs had no doubt about the social goal of bringing about a revolution and the political goal of
their sovereignty which are expressed in the couplet Raj Karega Khalsa. No body, Hindu or Sikh, ever objected
to the singing of this couplet during that period, or even long after that. In fact, earlier, Hindus also
supported this. Reaction changed only with the transfer of Power.
Dr Ganda Singh wrote a brief scholarly article on this subject, which appeared in the Sikh Review of
July, 1987. He deprecated some of the earlier attempts to twist the meaning of the couplet Ra Karega Khalsa
thus :
“The dread of Feringees suggested to some of the loyalists, afraid of being listed as rebels, a
compromise in giving to the word ‘Khalsa’ an alternate meaning as ‘pure.’ They wished to convey to the new
rulers that the Khalsa had then no political ambitions or aspirations to rule in the country, and that the
couplet, appended to their prayer, only meant that the ‘Pure’ shall rule.”
His conclusion was that the couplet “is a permanent and inseparable part of the Sikh prayer, and
should be recited as such on all occasions of prayer by all Sikhs and Sikh congregations, wherever they might
be, and in all Gurdwaras, historical or others.”®
Motives like the ones indicated by Dr Ganda Singh, continue, and so do, therefore, the controversy
and effort to misinterpret Gurbani and Sikh history, to suit the particular view. The basic question is as to
what is the Sikh ideology, or what the Gurus had been aiming at. Is Sikhism a church of worship alone ? Or
is it a church of social policy also ? This is a fundamental question. It is the difference on this issue that
leads to misconception, especially in the interpretation of history. Picking up a few isolated incidents from a
history of two centuries, and trying to relate them to a hymn or two from the bani, without regard to the total
ideology of the Gurus and their lives, can yield only half truths and wrong conclusions.
Sikhism is not an extension of the Bhakti Movement’, nor were the Gurus merely Bhaki#z Saints, who
started their own cult. Sikhism is a revealed religion and a mission, indeed the only whole-life religion or mir-
piri system, native to India. Outside India also, except Judaism and Islam, no whole-life system combining
spiritual and empirical life, has arisen. It is not an accident that the last five out of ten Gurus, maintained an
army, and the Fifth Guru created a ‘state within a state’, much to the annoyance of the Emperor of the day,
who later ordered his execution. It is Guru Nanak who calls God ‘Destroyer of the evil-doers and the
demonical.’ Again in Babar Vani, he unambiguously states that oppression of the weak is violative of the
otder of the Lord, and that the rulers are responsible to see that they are not oppressed. This would mean
that gurmukh who is committed to carry out the Will of God, must work for the creation of a society, in which
ageression, oppression and injustice are eliminated. This is a requirement in all whole-life religions. Thus,
social responsibility extends to the political field as well.
It is undeniable that the rulers have to ensure justice among their subjects, and that it is righteous to
confront oppression and injustice. Also, when kings or rulers fail to be virtuous, injustice and oppression are
invariably the result. To fight these evils, for over a hundered years, the Sikh Gurus maintained an army, for
which purpose initially even mercenaries had to be employed. This militarisation was progressive, until the
Tenth Guru created the Khalsa on Vaisakhi Day, 1699, and prescribed the &irpan as one of the five Kakars. It
is important to understand that in a whole-life system, monasticism, asceticism, celibacy, ahimsa, pacificism,
and all kinds of negativism, are rejected. This is a common characteristic of all whole-life systems, and these
fundamentals explain why this category of systems accepts socio-political responsibility, and others do not.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
The &irpan, it has to be understood, is not just a symbol; it is a bvkumnama, ermphasizing two things, viz., that
the Sikh society is both permitted and enjoined upon to use force as a last resort, for a righteous cause, and
second, that Sikhism should never turn monastic or resort to withdrawal. The &rpan as a weapon, may not
be of much public use today, but the injunction it represents, is fundamental and eternal.
Pleading against Political activities, a writer recently said, “They (The Gurus) were ready to take to
the sword, but always in self-defence, and only as a last resort. For the za#/um (tyranny) of the Governor of
Sithind, Guru Gobind Singh tried to seek redressal from Aurangzeb and Bahadur Shah, and waited for four
long years before sending Banda Bahadur to punish the culprits and transgressors. It is also significant that
when Banda Bahadur started establishing a State with the help of the Khalsa, a bukamnama was issued by
Mata Sundri asking the Khalsa to disassociate themselves from the objective, which did not have the approval
of the Tenth Guru, and they did so, which led to the defeat of Banda Bahadut.’”’
The first point is what was the z#/um that the Governor of Sirhind had committed. Was it during the
general course of administration over the years he had done it, or was there any specific act that was wrong or
tyrannical ? So far as the general administration of the Governor is concerned, there is nothing to suggest
that he did anything in violation of the orders or wishes of the Emperor in Delhi. In any case, there is
nothing known to have happened to which the Emperor could have taken offence, as being contrary to his
instructions, or for which only the Governor was responsible, and not the Emperor. If, however, the
reference is to martyrdom of the two younger Sabibzadas, we wonder if this could be the real or even a
laudable reason, for the Guru to depute Banda Singh Bahadur. Is it the writer’s suggestion that while there
was nothing wrong with the administration of the Emperor or the Governor, it was only the execution of the
two Sabibzadas that furnished a good reason to the Tenth Guru to seek revenge by directing Banda and the
Sikh armies to do so ? Also, can we accept the suggestion that the Gurus who were always the first to
sacrifice their person, would, in this case, seek revenge ? For, we know full well that no military reaction was
made after the martyrdom of the Ninth Guru, except the general preparation for confrontation with the
empire or the establishment as a whole, for its misrule over the decades. The Tenth Guru could not be
unaware that the attack on the Governor meant full scale war involving the death of thousands of Sikhs as
well as their opponents. Is it suggested that revenge, involving death and devastation on such a vast scale,
was justifiable ? And if that had really been the reason, would it serve as a good moral precedent or lesson
for the Sikhs or the people ? Further, even assuming that only the Governor was to be punished, the Tenth
Guru knew that it could not be accomplished without a major war, in which the Emperor at Delhi would not
remain unconcerned. And in the event of Banda’s victory and death of the Governor and other
transgressors, to whom was the rule of Sirhind to be handed over ?
It is known to every historian that one of the greatest humanitarian acts of the Sikh rule, was Banda’s
distribution of land among the poorest tillers. It was he who created “The Bold Peasantry” which continues
to be the backbone and the fundamental strength of the Punjab and the Sikh society. It is on the basis of this
precedent and tradition that, when the British Government wanted to turn the clock of socialisation back, by
granting only tenancy rights to settlers in the new Canal Colonies of the Punjab, that Sikhs and others agitated
and forced the Government to confer proprietory rights on them. Against this, it may be recalled that Martin
Luther, the great Christian reformer, called the peasants ‘mad dogs’, when they agitated for their rights against
the princes with whom he had sided. Equally significant is the fact that, in the French Revolution, which
took place eight decades after Banda, the peasants and the poor, or the Fourth Estate, had no place in the
leadership, which rested with the privileged middle classes. Nor were they among its beneficiaries. Jagjit
Singh in his book, In the Caravan of Revolutions has made a detailed comparison of the work of the Sikh Gurus
with the French Revolution, and has shown convincingly that the characteristics, ideals and achievements of
the Sikh Revolution, were in every respect, superior to, and more enduring than those of the French
Revolution.’
Now let us consider the alleged hukamnama issued by Mata Sundri asking the Khalsa “to disassociate
themselves from the objective which did not have the approval of the Tenth Guru.” It has been difficult for
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
us to locate the hukamnama of Mata Sundri, referred to in the above quotation. According to Dr Ganda
Singh, three writers have narrated the role of Banda Singh Bahadur, namely, Chhibar, Sarup Dass Bhalla, and
Rattan Singh Bhangoo. The first two make no mention of the bukamnama. In Bhangoo’s Panth Parkash, there
is a brief reference to the letter, said to have been written by Mata Sundri to the Khalsa. In that letter, there is
nothing to suggest that the objectives of the attack by Banda Singh, excluded establishment of Khalsa rule in
the land, or that the Khalsa was forbidden to rule. In fact, on the contrary, there is a clear statement that the
Guru had bestowed Patshahi (Rule or Sovereignty) on the Panth and not on any individual. Thus, the letter, by
implication and otherwise, far from denouncing the objective of temporal sovereignty, clearly records in the
words of Mata Sundri, that Patshahi was granted to the Sikhs (Banda Ko Khijmat dei, det patshahi nahet. Dei
patshahi Panth ni, aap Sache Patshab.)°
The above, we feel, explains, both the reason for the Tenth Master’s deputing Banda Singh, and the
letter written by Mata Sundri to clarify that objective.
The writing of Tamur Shah should also be revealing to everyone. He says that the Emperor
conveyed to the ‘Apostle of Tranquility and Harmony’, the Ninth Guru, that if he desisted from political
activities, and confined himself only to spiritual prayers and preaching, he would have no trouble, and, in fact,
would be given considerable grants.!0 But, the offer was spurned, with results that are a part of history.
Quoting Ghulam Hussain Khan in S%yarul Mutakharin, Sher Singh concludes that there were clear
apprehensions of revolt by the Guru, which would lead to the setting up of a Sikh State within the State.!!
Purther, quoting Higiqat-i-Bina uruj-i-firqa-i-sikhan he states that the Emperor feared that the people gathering
around Guru Tegh Bahadur, were emerging as a “new nation” (Mi/at-i-nan).'2
The unfortunate part is that often persons conditioned by pacificist influences, fail to understand the
Saint-Soldier concept. The Ninth Guru embodied it as much as the Tenth Guru. The establishment has
generally used aggression and oppresssion as the means to perpetuate its power, and the Saint-Soldier, as the
instrument of God’s Will, must inevitably come into clash with it. This is the eternal equation. For, ‘the
earth belonging to the ‘Saint’, is being usurped by robbers.’ Hence, the struggle for its liberation. The lesson
of history is that the series of martyrdoms initiated by the Fifth Guru, the Ninth Guru, the Sabibzadas, and the
Tenth Guru, is a single historical process, and it would, we feel, be a sheer distortion, to reduce this glorious
spiritual marvel to the level of personal revenge, as we egoist humans do or conceive under the cover of
morality.
With regard to the critics’ argument that the Gurus did not establish a political state for themselves to
tule,!* and that, therefore, the Sikhs should also not entertain any such ambition, it must be noted that no
state could be established without a direct clash with the Mughals during the Gurus’ time. A state could be
governed either by becoming a vassal of Delhi and paying tribute to it, or by snatching a territory from the
Empire after an inevitable clash with it. Thus, the choice was between becoming a subordinate of Delhi and
a military confrontation with the Empire. The question of the first alternative did not arise. The second was,
therefore, the alternative for which preparations were already afoot. The community was being motivated,
and the Khalsa created. Evidently, confrontation could not be undertaken effectively before Vaisakhi, 1699,
when the Khalsa appeared as the climax of the Sikh religious movement. The Khalsa was to spearhead the
struggle against the forces of the Establishment, which indulged in oppression and repression against the
helpless subjects. Even the Rajas were invited to join in, but, as is well-known, they declined. It was only
after the organisational and preparatory work was completed, that the Guru deputed Banda Singh Bahadur to
lead the Expedition to Sirhind.
It may be added that the Gurus never wanted an empire for themselves. Their aim was organisation
of a community with trained motivations and aspirations to live as fraternal people with a sense of
independence and capacity to discharge complete socio-political responsibilities, including struggle against
oppression of the invaders and the Establishment.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Opponents of temporal authority for the Khalsa, often quote verses from Guru Granth Sahib, that
eulogise Naam Simran and decry hankering after worldly power and personal redemption. The most often
quoted and misinterpreted verse is : “Raj na chahon, mukt na chahon, man preet charan kamlare.”'> Commenting
upon critics who draw upon this verse, Sirdar Kapur Singh says that “they do not understand that these are
not injunctions or commandments of Sikhism, nor statements of a doctrine.” !© These are mere clues to mood
inducement with emphasis on the love of the Lord. Here ‘ra referes to the lust for power for the individual
for personal agerandisement, which is deprecated. It does not mean that a community or a society shall not
manage its socio-political affairs itself, or that it shall leave these things to outsiders. If that argument is
stretched a little further, no effort should have been made to end the foreign rule of the Mughals or the
British in India, for we do not want to rule (Raj na chabon). Secondly, the emphasis of the verse is on the Love
of the Lotus Feet of the Lord (Preet Charan Kamlare). Yt says that the bliss of love is greater than the pleasures
of autocratic authority or despotism. This does not amount to condemnation of rg or the act of ruling, even
indirectly. When we want to stress the real merit of something, we compare it with something that is
cherished, and not with something that has no value. For example, when we want to stress the sweetness of
something, we say it sweater than honey; the sweetness of which is universally acknowledged. In this
compatison we are not condemning honey. Another example to prove the same point is the widely quoted
verse of Guru Nanak, ‘Sachon are sabh ko, upar sach ovcharey which means “Truth is higher than everyting; higher
still is true living.” The Guru stresses the practice of truth by calling it even higher than truth. No stretch of
imagination can construe it as rejection of truth. The society placed a high value on both raj and mukii.
Through the verse, quoted earlier, the Guru places the Love of the Lord above everything else. If, however,
we interpret this verse to mean that raj is being forbidden to the society of the Gurus’ disciples, it would
mean that the Gurus are condemning the society to perpetual subjugation and slavery. This is unthinkable.
The Gurus never missed an opportunity to stress the importance of Naam on their Sikhs. This finds
expression in Guru Granth Sahib so frequently, that often Sikhism has been described as Naam Marg. Such
verses ate often invoked to plead that Sikh religion preaches ‘interiority’, and that the only thing that a Sikh
should do is Naam Simran, which is further explained as muttering of a name, and no more. This is a grossly
partial and inadequate view of the Gurus’ teachings. In Sikhism, Naam has much wider scope, and expresses
itself in the love for the creation of God, or mankind. It is the realization of the immanence of God, or the
presence of the Creator in all His creation, a recognition of His altruistic Will, and a call to carry it out. Naam
is the ability to see the Lord in every fellow being, which would determine the nature of man’s dealings with
them. This can by no stretch of imagination lead to neglect of social responsibilities and obligations. Rather,
the Gurus have repeatedly emphasized deeds, which alone, in their opinion, determine man’s closeness to or
distance from the Lord.
Another aspect of this slogan “Raj Karega Khalsa ......”, which is frequently missed, is the emphasis on
its democratic character. It means that the authority to rule vest in the ‘Khalsa’ or the collectivity of the
people, and not an individual. Monarchy or autocracy are completely ruled out. Following this, the Sikh rule
in the 19th century over North India was called ‘Sarkar-i-Khalsa” Maharaja Ranjit Singh who was head of the
state never donned a crown or sat on a throne. Even the affairs of the army were controlled by an Army
Panchayat.
Before we close, it may be proper to look at the couplet “Raj Karega Khalsd’ affirming the need for
temporal authority, again. It is simply an announcement of the determination of the Khalsa to look after its
own affairs, including exercise of temporal authority and setting up of a government. Now, what is wrong
with it ? It is a democratic resolve, and in these days, all political parties openly declare their intention to
provide a government, and nobody objects. In fact, governments organise this exercise regularly. How could
the same thing be a taboo in Sikhism ? It is also understood that Sikhs will exercise authority only in areas
largely populated by them. And if the Sikhs are forbidden to rule in such areas, which are theirs, who will do
it for them ? Will they hire outsiders for this purpose ? And if the outsiders do not run it properly, what will
they do ? Will they not revolt ? Is perpetual revolt their destiny 2? Why cannot they discharge this legitimate
responsibility themselves, which is enjoined upon them by the Gurus ? It should be clear that exercise of
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
temporal authority is a perfectly legitimate aspiration, which does not infringe upon the sovereignty of others.
It is a resolve to discharge a fundamental and vital responsibility. There is no reason why anybody, much less
Sikhs themselves, should object to it.
REFERENCES
Ganda Singh (ed.) : Bhai Nand Lal Granthavh, Punjabi University, Patiala, p. 285.
Kapur Singh : Raj Karega Khalsa, $.G.P.C. Amritsar, 1987, page 3.
Jit Singh Sital (ed.) : S77 Guru Panth Parkash of Rattan Singh Bhangoo, S.G.P.C., Amritsar,
1987, p. 285.
Ibid., p. 41.
Ibid., p. 319.
Ganda Singh : The True Import of Raj Karega Khalsa, The Sikh Review, Calcutta, July 1987, pp.
fe
Dhanoa, S.S. : The Meaning of Raj Karega Khalsa, The Sikh Review, Calcutta, December, 1990,
pp. 24-206.
Jagjit Singh : In the Caravan of Revolutions, 1987.
Jit Singh Sital (ed.) : S77 Guru Panth Parkash of Rattan Singh Bhangoo, S.G.P.C., Amritsar,
p. 1891.
A.C. Banerjee: Journal of Sikh Studies, February, 1976, p. 61 G.N.D. University, Amritsar.
Anonymous : Hagigat-i-Bina,Uruj-i-Firqa-i-Sikhan 1783 A.D. p. 3-6, quoted by Sher Singh,
The Sikh Review, Calcutta, Feb., 1991.
Ibid., p. 22.
Guru Granth Sahib : p. 965.
Dhanoa, S.S.: op. cit.
Guru Granth Sahib, p. 435.
Kapur Singh : Sikhism and Politics, S.G.P.C., Amritsar, 1987, p. 17.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
37
AUTHENTICITY OF KARTARPURI BIR
DALJEET SINGH
INTRODUCTION
It is Guru Arjun Dev who made the important and sagacious decision to compile the Aad Granth as
the Sikh scripture so that the spiritual and ideological identity of the Sikh Religion and Panth is established.
An additional reason for the Guru to undertake the task was that it had come to his notice that persons
outside the Panth were writing devotional hymns and giving them currency as the production of the Gurus. It
is a settled and accepted tradition that the Fifth Guru compiled the Aad Granth with Bhai Gurdas as the
scribe; and that the original Aad Granth is present with the Sodhis at Kartarpur. After the study of this Brr by
Dr Jodh Singh and the publication of his book, Kartarpuri Bir De Darshan, it was considered that the
authenticity of the Bir had been firmly established; but some oblique and incorrect observations by McLeod
tended to throw doubt on its authenticity. It was, therefore, considered necessary to make a detailed study of
the issue after a close examination of the Bzr at Kartarpur. This article comprises the result of that
examination.
CUSTODY
After its preparation, the Bzr was installed at Harimandar Sahib, Amritsar, on Bhadon Sudhi Ist Samat
1661. The tradition and historical writings are unanimous that from Amritsar the Aad Granth was shifted to
Kartarpur when the family of the Sixth Guru moved to that place. It is accepted that the original Aad Granth
remained with the family of Dhirmal, the great grandson of the Guru, and his descendants at Kartarpur, even
after the Gurus had shifted from there. Historical writings are also clear that during the time of the Ninth
and Tenth Gurus, the Aad Granth was with the successors of Dhirmal. For, many copies of the Aad Granth,
in which the bani (hymns) of the Ninth Guru had been recorded in the time of the Ninth or the Tenth Guru,
show that those had been corrected by comparison with the Granth of the Fifth Guru.’ It is not in doubt
that all through the subsequent period, the Aad Granth at Kartarpur remained the Granth of reference for
authenticating the bani of the Gurus and the bhagats. And, it remained in the custody of the Sodhis of
Kartarpur. After 1708 A.D., the Sikhs passed through an extremely difficult time. In that period, the
question of the change of the custody of the Aad Granth could not arise. After Ranjit Singh came into
power, he procured the Granth for himself and kept it with him as a national treasure of the Sikhs. After the
British conquest of the Punjab, the Bzr passed into the hands of the Indian Government. Thereafter, the Bir
became the subject of a civil suit and it was restored to the descendants of Dhirmal. Therefore, its custody
first with the Sodhis of Kartarpur, then with Ranjit Singh, and again with the Kartarpur family, is an
important piece of evidence. Because, the presence and recovery of a manuscript, document, or book from
its natural and proper custody and environment is a relevant and weighty factor in showing its originality.
CLAIM OF ORIGINALITY UNDISPUTED
We are not aware of any other copy of Aad Granth on behalf of which any claim of originality has
evet been made. In India where there is an unfortunate tendency to make false claims about the presence of
sacred places, scriptures, documents, manuscripts, etc., the singular absence of any claim of originality for any
other Ber, is a very remarkabale fact to show that the authenticity of the Kartarpuri Bir has never been in
doubt. Before we record the internal evidence showing the authenticity of the B7r, we shall indicate the
method adopted in writing the Kartarpuri Bir.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
METHOD OF WRITING
The knowledge of this method is necessary for understanding why the original Aad Granth has
certain unusual features and incongruities and why those could never occur in a Granth which had been
copied from the original or another Granth. The bani of Aad Granth has been classified rag-wise, and in each
rag the bani has been recorded Guru-wise, bhagat bani being at the end. A particular sequence in regard to
shabads, saloks, ashtpadis, chhants, vars has been observed. In bhagat bani, the bani of Kabir comes first, then of
Namdev, and thereafter of bhagat Ravi Das and others. In order to eliminate any chance of interpolation the
couplets or verses (padas) have been numbered. In addition, the shabads, saloks, etc.,of a particular Guru or rag
have also been numbered serially. Further, reference of these numbers of shabads is given in the table of
contents, along with the quotation of the first words of each hymn. Hence, there cannot be any chance of
interpolation without it being detected. The scribe had also to devise a method by which the task could be
accomplished easily and speedily. It is important to understand that while the bani was being recorded in the
Granth, the work of collection of bani of the first four Gurus and the bhagats was also going on
simultaneously. Therefore, the scribe had to take care of two things, first, that an adequate number of leaves
were allotted to a particular rag, and within a rag to each Guru or bhagat, so as to enable the scribe to write
within the allotted space the related bani anticipated to be available. Secondly, the bani under each rag was
being written simultaneously, and, while the bani of one Guru, bhagat, or author was being collected, it was
also being sorted out and recorded separately at appropriate places under each rag in accordance with the set
scheme that had been devised. There being a single scribe for this gigantic task, sometimes this anticipation
went wrong and many of the incongtuities, as we shall see, are due to wrong anticipation, or late collection of
bani. We also find that the numbering of the leaves of the book had been done in advance. The pages of the
Kartarpuri Bir show two things. If the book is opened, the number of the page stands given only to the page
on the left hand side; the page facing on the right hand side is deemed to be a part of it. We might call the
page on the left 15/1, and the one on the right 15/2. However, in the Kartarpuri Bir, the number given to
the page on the left is 15 and not 15/1. Secondly, after making a rough guess about the bami likely to be
available for each section or rag, one or more clusters or bunches of eight or sixteen leaves each, numbered in
advance, were allotted for each rag or section of the bam. And, as and when the bani, or part of it, of a
particular rag, section, Guru, or bhagat was available, it was sorted out and copied out at the appropriate place
in the concerned packets or sections, in proper sequence. In addition, totals of padas, shabads, or shaloks of
each Guru or the totals of the shabads of each rag are also serially given. We shall hereafter record pieces of
internal evidence into two parts: (1) those that are individually conclusive, and (1) those that are, coupled
with other evidence, conclusive in showing the authenticity of the Bir.
Individually Conclusive Factors: (1) The Japu of Guru Nanak was recorded by the Fourth Guru. In all
the handwritten Bzrs the practice was to record either the words “Japu Nisan”, or “Copy of the Copy of the
Japu recorded by Guru Ram Das.” If the Ber was a third copy of the original Brr of the Fifth Guru, it would
say “Copy of the copy of the copy of the Japu recorded by Guru Ram Das.” As the Fourth Guru was the
person who collected and wrote the Japa, and the Fifth Guru was the first person to compile Aad Granth and
copy Japu therein, in the Kartarpuri Bir alone it is written “Copy of the Japu recorded in the hand of Guru
Ram Das.” No other Brr records these words, for, Bhai Gurdas was the first person to copy the Japw from
the collection and writing by the Fourth Guru.
(2) Secondly, in this Bir at page 45, the dates of the demise of the first four Gurus alone are with the
same pen and ink and in the hand of the original scribe of the Bir. The date of the demise of the
Fifth Guru is in the hand of the original scribe but with a different pen and shade of ink. No
other Brr fulfils this test. It is also very significant that while writing the dates of the demise of
the first four Gurus, the day of the week is not mentioned. But in the case of the Fifth Guru,
apart from the date, the day of the week is also mentioned though the scribe is the same. This
shows clearly that the date of the demise of the Fifth Guru was written by Bhai Gurdas on a later
day, otherwise had all the five dates been wirtten at one time, either the day would have been
mentioned in all the case or been absent from all the five entries.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
(3) Thirdly, the words “Swdh” or “Sudb Keeche’ (Tt is correct” or “correct it”) appear at so many
places in the Bir. These are supposed to be in the hand of the Fifth Guru since these are in a
different hand and not in the hand of the scribe of the Bzr, and the handwriting of these marginal
observations resembles the handwriting of the Néshan of the Fifth Guru in the Bzr. These words
appear in other handwritten Brrs as well. But those are in the same hand as of the scribe of the
concerned Bzr, showing that the Bzris a copy and not the original.
The historical writings of Bhai Santokh Singh, Bhai Gurdas, Gur Bilas Chhevin Patshahi
and others,’ and the tradition assert that the Fifth Guru completed the Aad Granth in Bhadon
Samat, 1661. The Kartarpuri Bir is the only Brr which records that it was completed in Bhadon,
1661 “Samat 1661 Miti Bhadon Vadi ekam I pothi ikh poubnche.’ There is no handwritten Bzr the
record of which claims the same to have been completed on Bhadon Samat, 1661 or near about.
In fact, this dated volume being the earliest, it is a good piece of evidence not only to show the
authenticity of the Kartarpuri Bir but also to fix the date of the preparation of the Br by the
Fifth Guru.
(4) We have explained the method of allotment of clusters of papers for a rag or a proposed section
of the Granth. For the expeditious completion of the work, the adoption of this method was
natural and necessary, especially when the work of copying the collection of bani from different
sources was going on side by side. This prior allotment of pages for a section had to be very
liberal, so as to ensure that the available bani should not exceed the allotted space, nor thereby
upset the entire system and sequence of rags and sections. But, evidently, this liberal allotment of
leaves, based on rough anticipation of the bani likely to be available, was, in practice, bound to
lead to a large number of pages remaining blank between different sections of the Aad Granth.
And, this is what has actually happened in the case of the Kartarpuri Bir. The total numbered
leaves of the Kartarpuri Bir are 974, comprising 1948 pages. Of these pages, 453 are entirely
blank, hundreds of other pages are partly blank, and, considering that a fully utilized page
accommodates 24 lines, the total space available on these partly blank pages comes up to another
133 full pages. Thus, of the total 1948 pages of this volume, the space of 586 of them remained
unused. It is evident that this state of affairs could only arise in the originally written Aad
Granth; it could never have happened in an Aad Granth which had been copied from the
original. It is a fact that none of the writers like Jodh Singh, Harbhajan Singh and others, who
have seen numerous handwritten Bzrs, state that any of the old handwritten Bis contains any
blank pages or spaces. Obviously, in a copy, the very question of hundreds of pages being left
blank does not arise, especially when it is copied by a single scribe. Because, in such a case the
copyist has the entire material, ready and in proper sequence, before him for copying. The
Banno Bir, which is supposed to be a copy of it, has only 467 folios. It is, therefore, out of
question that the Kartarpuri Bir with 974 folios could be a copy of a Granth which had material
that could be accommodated in about 467 folios. Generally, all the old handwritten Bzrs,
including the Kartapuri Bir, are in one hand. Therefore, this internal evidence in the Kartarpuri
Bir is both incontrovertible and singly conclusive to show its originality.
(5) There are many shabads of bani which have originally been written twice but later this duplication
has either been erased by /artal (a chemical used in those days to remove the writing), or scored
out with the observation in the margin that the shabad was a duplication. In a copied Brr this
duplication could never arise. This could happen only in the original in which case either the
scribe himself or the compiler has on revision found the error and got the same removed by
scoring out the duplicate shabad or shalok. This duplication has happened at pages 96/2, 186/2,
483/1, 511/1, 550/2, 836/1, 943/2, etc. Thus these duplications, too, are conclusive to prove its
authenticity.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
(6) There is another set of corrected incongruities which shows conclusively the authenticity of
Kartarpuri Bir. At page 778/1 there is a marginal note that shalok No. 22 of Mahila 1 which is
recorded at page 799 and is correct should be read there at that page after shabk No. 21. It is
also indicated at page 778/1 that shalok “Maru Mahila 3” “Agam Agochar Ve-Parwaha’ which is
there on this page should be read at page 788. Further, at page 788 there is a corresponding note
that the 23rd shalok of Mahila 3 Agam Agochar Ve Parwaba which is at page 778 should be read
there. At page 799/2 Maru Mahila 1, the shalok of which the correct place is at page 778, after
shalok No. 21 of Mahila 1 , stands recorded. Now, these inadvertent incongruities are such as
could not be rectified except by cross-references, especially as shalok of Mahila 3 is long and
could not be accommodated in the margin at page 788, nor could Maru Mahila 1 at page 799/2
be accommodated at page 778 and scored out at page 799/2. In the Tatkara (contents of shaloks
and shabads), too, these incongtuities are reflected but rectified. At page 16/1 of the Tatkara, the
first lines of all the shaloks of Mahila are written with their serial numbers 1 to 21. But in the
margin, against shalok No. 21 of Mahila 1, the first line of shalok Kudrat Karnekar Apara of Mahila
1, is vertically recorded. Its number is noted as No. 22 and page 799.
Further, at page 16/1 of the Tatkara, since in the text shalok of Mahila 3 Agam Agochar Ve-Parwaha
actually, but incongruously, starts at page 778 immediately after shalok No. 21 of Mahila 1, its reference
number and the first line of the shabad are recorded in the beginning, but its number is correctly given as
shalok No. 23 of Mahila 3. Again, at this page 16/1 after the number and the first line of shalokk No. 22 of
Mahila 3, the number and line is of shalok 24 of Mahila 3. This is so because in the actual text shalok No. 23
of Mahila 3 comes between shalok 21 of Mahila 1 and shalok No. 1 of Mahila 3 at page 778 and not between
shalok Nos. 22 and 24 of Mahila 3 at page 788. Another important feature of page 16/1 of the Tatkara is that
the original sha/ok numberings of the first 23 shaloks of Mabila 3 on this page have been rubbed with arfa/ and
thereafter these very 23 shaloks have been re-numbered, the first one as 23 and the remaining 22 numbers as 1
to 22. This clearly shows that originally the incongruity in the placement of shaloks 23 of Mahila 3 and shalok
No. 22 of Mahila 1, that occurred in the text, was, actually reflected in the Ta/kara by the scribe. But, when
the out-of-sequence placements of these sha/oks were later detected, the incongruities in the text were rectified
by giving cross-references in the margin of the text at the appropriate pages, and, the errors in the Tatkara
were corrected by rubbing with /arta/ the numbers of the first 23 shaloks of Mahila 3 and re-numbering them
as numbers 23 and 1 to 22 of Mahila 3, and, in the case of, shalok No. 22 of Mahila 1, by writing its page and
number correctly in the margin of page 16/1.
We have detailed these connected sets of corrections in the text and the Tutkara because these
incongruities could happen only at the time of the original writing and never in the case of copying from the
original text compiled by the Fifth Guru. It is also important to mention that on examination, no other Bir
has revealed this set of incongruities at pages 778, 788 and 799 of the text and in the corresponding portions
of the Tatkara. By itself this set of corrections alone is conclusive in proving the authenticity of the
Kartarpuri Bir.
(7) Here we shall record a number of other corrected mistakes which in their character, implication
and importance are similar to the ones described above.
(a) At page 804/2 it is recorded in the margin that instead of the 21st Pawri, 22nd has been written.
Correspondingly on page 805/1 there is a note in the margin that the Pawri there should be sung
and written as 21th Pawri. This error of sequence could never occur in a copy.
(b) There are numerous instances where shabads, shaloks and a part of bani have been written in the
margin, evidently, because in each case the bani appears to have been found or collected later on
and there being no place on the relevant page it had to be recorded in the margin. In some cases
the bani has been given the proper serial number and the numbers of the subsequent bani te-
numbered. But, in some cases, numbers following them have remained uncorrected and the bani
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
in the margin has been given the same number as to the sha/ok or shabad after which it has to be
read. These incongruities are so large in number and the bani has been written in the margin at
so many places that all this could happen only in the original, either because of the late collection
of bani or because the scribe, Bhai Gurdas, had not recorded it in its right sequence. For
example, at pages 154/2, 252/1, 364/1, 694/1, 945, 182, 946,1, 148/2, 374/2, etc. additional
bani has been written in the margins. At pages 940/1, 940/2, etc., the bani recorded in the
margins has been given the same number as borne by one of the shabads on the page. Again, on
pages 251/1, 2605/2, 2606/2, 399/2, 252/1, 499/2, 689/2, 690/1, 842/2, 841/2, etc., portions of
the bani have been written in the margin and a mark given at the relevant place on the page to
show where the marginal portion should be read.
(c) We know that at the end of each shabad or shalok the total of Pads, the total of shabads of each
Gutu, total of shabads of each rag, etc., have been recorded. The number of Mahila is also
invariably given in addition. But, in the Kartarpuri Bir in scores of cases the number, totals, etc.
were missed originally but were written later in small letters either in between or above the lines
or in the margins, e.g. this has happened at pages 154/2, 164/2, 174/1, 240/2, 257/1,267/1,
269/1, 270/1, 270/2, 399/1, 455/2, 802/2, etc. Apart from that, in quite a large number of
cases, these totals have not been given or given incompletely. This incongruity and its
rectification as mentioned above are very common. There is a very clear reason for this feature
of the Kartarpuri Bir. As the job of collection of bani and its recording was being done
simultaneously, the scribe was never sure whether more shabads or bani of a Guru, requiring
precedence of sequence over the shabads of bani already written, would or would not be available.
As such, he had, as a necessary precaution and in order to aviod repeated scoring out and
alterations of the totals, to leave the work of totalling to a later date. Therefore, this task of
recording the totals had to be done as one of the last jobs to be completed. Perforce, the totals
had to be squeezed in between or above the lines in small sized figures or in the margins. But
such a position, too, could never arise in a copied Granth where the numbering would be
complete and form a part of the line itself. The scribe could never fail to copy or record them in
appropriate lines, even if in the original the numberings had been missing or been recorded in
between or above the lines. In other handwritten Bers these incongruities do not occur. Even in
the Banno Bir, totals are given in the lines themselves. Hence this feature of the Kartarpuri Bir,
especially the large number in which these incongruities or omissions appear, proves its
authenticity and originality.
(d) There is another kind of discrepancy in serial-wise numbering. On a number of pages the bani
ot the shabad has been scored out or removed by the use of harfa/, But, the old serial numbering
has remained uncorrected, e.g., this has happened at pages 186/2, 970/1. In some cases, the
incongruity even stands reflected in the Tatkara, because as the numbering has remained
uncorrected in the Granth, it could evidently not be corrected in the Tatkara which records only
the state of numbering or sequence in the Granth, e.g. mention of shalok number 94/1 in the
Tatkara at page 7 has been scored out, and the numbering of subsequent references stands
uncorrected. The large number of cancellations and uncorrected numberings in this Bzr prove its
originality since such a state could never occur in a copy.
(e) As noted already, within the bani of a rag or section, the sequence of shabads or shaloks is
Guruwise. After it, normally comes the bani of Kabir, Namdev, Ravidas and then other bhagats.
But, the sources of the bani of bhagat Kabir and other bhagats being quite scattered, its collection
and selection for incorporation in the Granth must have taken quite long, since the same
involved in the case of each part a scrutiny and decision by the Guru himself. The result was
that in many instances the bani of bhagat Kabir appears in between, and that also not at one place,
or after the recorded bani of bhagat Namdev. It might be argued that such an abnormal sequence
being in the original, it would also be there in a copy of it; therefore, the Kartarpuri Bir, cannot
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
claim any originality on this account. But, it is significant that the bani of bhagat Kabir, which is
not in proper sequence has, evidently, been written on different occasions. This is clear from the
fact that though the writing of these hymns is by the same scribe, in each case the writing differs
in the size and shape of letters and the shade of ink. Had the Kartarpuri Bir been a copy, these
differences in the shades of ink and the size of the letters that are there, could not have occurred,
even though the break in sequence would have been there, because of the corresponding break
being present in the original, e.g. at pages 842/2, 810/1 and 863/2, though the scribe is the
same, the shades of ink and size of writing are different even in the case of the bani of the same
bhagat or Guru. Therefore, while variations in sequence can be explained, variations in pens,
shades of ink, and size of letters of the bani of the same bhagat cannot be explained in a
continuous writing, except on the assumption that the Kartarpuri Bir is the original and these
vatiations occurred because of the variant timings of collection, selection and recording of the
bani of a particular bhagat. Besides, because of this noncontinuous writing of bhagat bani, the
totals of the shabads of a bhagat have not been given as has been done in other cases. The fact is
that in the Kartarpuri Bir, the bani of bhagat Kabir, and even some other bani, when found and
selected later on have not at many places been recorded in the normal serial sequence of the Ber.
But, these hymns have been wirtten wherever space was available and even in the margin or
between the bani of other bhagats, e.g. at pages 885/2, 945/1. But, the shades of ink and pens
used for such bani are different showing clearly variant times of its original collection and
recording in the Kartarpuri Bir.
(f) Another feature of the Kartarpuri Bir is the large number of pages where the original writing has
been obliterated by /artal and later at those very places bani has been written. Sometimes the space
accommodating a whole shabad or hymn has been cleaned with hartal and new bani written at the
place e.g, at pages 840/1, 870/2, 966/1, 966/2. Had the Kartarpuri Bir been a copy of the original,
such a large number of places requiring the need of scoring out or rubbing or cleaning with hartal
could never have arisen.
(g) Another significant feature of the Kartarpuri Bir is that at numerous places the headings and
words like E& Onkar or the Mahila, or name of the rag are written, but below these headings there is
no bani ot shabad and the place is blank. This is so at pages 279/2, 297/2, 248/1, 528/1, 520/2,
348/1,468/2, 607/2, 617/1, 621/2. This writing of the heading like Mahila, rag etc., by the scribe
clearly indicates that it was thought that the bani of that Guru or bhagat would be available for being
written there, but actually it was either not available or not approved by the Fifth Guru. In a mere
copy of the Aad Granth, such a thing could never happen, because where the original has no bani the
question of recording the heading of a shabad or bani could never arise. Such recording of headings
only, without being followed by related bani, is not present in any other handwritten Bir. It is also
significant to mention that almost all these headings relate to the Fifth Guru who was alive at that
time, e.g. pages 297/2, 248/1, 348/1, 418/2, 469/2, 528/1, 530/2, 607/2, 610/2, 617/1, and
621/2. Presumably, Bhai Gurdas’ anticipation was that more shabads of the Guru were likely to be
available under those Rags. This is also an important proof to show the originality of the Kartarpuri
Bir. Because in a copy the occurrence of all these extra or lone headings, involving wrong
anticipation, relating mostly to the Fifth or the living Guru could not arise.
(9) Other Important Factors: (a) The originality of the Kartarpuri Bir is also established by the
Nishan or mark of the Fifth Guru. This mark, in those days meant, according to the accepted
practice and tradition, the writing of the Ma/ Mantra of the Japwji in the hand of the Guru, the Fifth
Guru in this case. This Nishan appears on page 29/1 of the Bir. As a mark of adoration, the page
has been profusely decorated. The presence of the Nishan of the Fifth Guru is also noted in the
Tatkara.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
(b) At page 415/1 in the margin are written the words “The shabad is tight.” This shabad does not
find mention in the Takara. But, this observation in the margin shows that for this Bzr, there
was a supervisor or editor, other than the scribe, who alone could record such an observation of
approval regarding the shabad on the page. This observation shows the original character of the
Kartarpuri Bir. Otherwise, if the Bzr had been copied from another Bz, the question of such an
obeservation by the scribe or some other person would not arise.
(c) In the Tatkara of shabads only the references of shabads 1 to 58 of Ramkali Mahila 5 are given.
But, on page 681/2 of the Bir, which starts with shabad 59 of Ramkali Mahila 5 and ends with
shabad 60 of Ramkali Mahila 5, two additional shabads of the Fifth Guru are written. Both these
Shabads are in a different hand from that of the scribe and their reference in the Tatkara of
shabads is missing. This means that these two shabads were added or got added there by the
editor or the compiler. Here again, the absence of the reference of these two shabads in the
Tatkara and their text being in a different hand from that of the original scribe suggest that this
feature could be only in the original and not in a copy. Because in a copy all the 1 to 60 shabads
would normally be in the same hand. Similarly, Ramkah Mahila 5 Chhand No. 21 has no
reference in the Tatkara, but the Chhand is present at its proper place, though it is in a different
hand. This, too, supports the earlier inference drawn in the case of shabads 59 and 60. In both
cases, the bani being of the Fifth Guru, it is very likely that he created it after 1604 A.D. and got
it added at the appropriate places in the Aad Granth later on. The position is similar in the case
of Basant ki Var composed by the Fifth Guru. This Var is recorded on page 854/2 in the
middle of this page. But, there is no reference of this Var in the Tutkara, showing that the Fifth
Guru composed it and got it included after Bhadon 1604 A.D. Hence, it could not find
mention in the Tatkara that stood already completed. It is significant that in all other
handwritten Brrs, including the Banno Brr, reference of the aris present in the Tatkara.
(d) At page 540 of the Bir the Neshan of the Sixth Guru is present. Its presence is also
mentioned in the Tatkara. In the circumstances of the case, this is a very significant and
natural thing to do. During the time of the Fifth Guru it had become abundantly clear that
Guru Hargobind would succeed him. In fact, from the very start the Sixth Guru was
associated with the task of the collection of the bani and preparation of the scripture. Some
writers have even suggested that some of the dhunnies were got recorded by the Sixth Guru.
They derive this inference from the fact that it is in the Kartarpuri Bir alone that we observe
that the dhunnies of some Vars are recorded in a different hand or in small letters in between
ot above the normal written lines. In other copies of the Granth, including the Banno Bir,
these have been wirtten in the lines and in the same manner as the bani itself. It evidently
suggests that in the Kartarpuri Bir the dhunnies were written on some later date, and
presumably at the instance of the Sixth Guru.
CONCLUSION FROM INTERNAL EVIDENCE
We have detailed above the various pieces and types of internal evidence most of which are
individually and incontrovertibly conclusive in proving that the Kartarpuri Bir is the original Aad Granth
compiled by the Fifth Guru in 1604 A.D. The other pieces of evidence we have recorded are cumulatively, or
coupled with the other evidence, equally conclusive in proving the authenticity of the Kartarprui Bir to be the
original production of the Fifth Guru.
EXAMINATION OF CRITICISM BY MCLEOD
Before we deal with the criticism of McLeod, let us record the present position and academic
findings about the Banno Bir. This Bris at present with the successors of Bhai Banno at Kanpur. It has
been carefully seen by Bhai Mahan Singh, who examined the Kartarpuri Bir as well as a team of scholars from
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
the Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, Prof. Pritam Singh, who has written a paper on the subject, and
Principal Harbhajan Singh of Sikh Missionary College, Amritsar. All of them have concluded that this Bzr was
recotded in Samat 1699 (thirty eight years after the preparation of the Brr by the Fifth Guru) and this is the
yeat written in the Brr itself. Secondly, in this Br the controversial shabad, “Ranjhunara gao Sakhr’, is clearly a
later interpolation because it is written in very small letters in a different shade of ink from the original writing
of the Bir. These two conclusions about the Banno Bir are academically accepted and are not in doubt.
We now tecord the criticism by McLeod. He writes :
“First, there is the universal agreement that the important differences distinguishing the Kartarpur
manuscript from the Banno version consist exclusively of material included in the latter which is not
to be found in the former. Secondly, there is the testimony of those who have inspected the
Kartarpuri manuscript concerning the obliteration of portions of its text.”
“A third factor is the presence in the standard printed editions of two fragments, corresponding to
two of the three additional Banno hymns. In Ramkali rag there occurs a single couplet where there
should apparently be a complete hymn. The remainder of the hymns in the same section indicate
that the couplet must be either the first two lines of a chhant, or a sha/ok introducing a chhant. The
second fragment corresponds to the Sar Das hymn in Sarang rag. In this instance the standard printed
text contains only the first line. There seemed to be only one possible reason for the appearance of
these two fragments. The bulk of the hymn in each case must have been deleted, leaving a small
remainder which was faithfully copied into the standard printed text.”
“A fourth point seemed to clinch the issue. The Banno text of the missing portions indicated good
reasons for later deletion, particularly in the case of the Ramkali hymn by Guru Arjun. This hymn
describes the puberty rites conducted by Guru Arjun at the initiation of his son Hargobind. The rites
follow a standard Hindu pattern and in the third stanza there is a reference to the manner in which
the boy’s head was shaved. This feature is an obvious contradiction to the later prohibition of hait
cutting. When the prohibition became mandatory, not merely for Jat Sikhs but also those of other
castes, the reference in the hymn could only be regarded as intolerable.”
“Finally, there was ample evidence that others had already formed the same suspicions concerning
the Kartarpur manuscript and were seeking alternative explanations. One writer has declared that the
present Kartarpur manuscript is a Banno version, adding that the original manuscript of the Aad
Granth must have been lost. Another has suggested that the present manuscript must be a first
draft, subsequently amended by the Guru himself. Their evident uneasiness strengthened a
hypothesis which already seemed firmly founded.”
“By this time the hypothesis will have become obvious. The conclusion which seemed to be
emerging with increasing assurance was that the widely disseminated Banno version must represent
the original text; and that the Kartarpur manuscript must be a shortened version of the same text. A
few portions must have been deleted because they could not be reconciled with beliefs subsequently
accepted by the Panth. This much appeared to be well established and another point could be added
as a possibility. It seemed likely that the amendments had originally been made by omitting the
problem passage from later manuscripts rather than by deleting them from the Kartarpur manuscript.
These later manuscripts reflected the distinctive pattern of Khalsa belief. The omission of the
problem passage together with the addition of compositions by Guru Tegh Bahadur constituted the
Damdama version of the Aad Granth. Later still, portions of the Kartarpur manuscript (the orginal
manuscript written by Bhai Gurdas) were rather ineptly obliterated in order to bring the two versions
F : 4
into line.”
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
It appears that McLeod is unaware of the work done by Sahib Singh who disbelives the Banno story
and the statements of Mahan Singh and others who have recorded the two findings mentioned earlier. For,
had it been known to him, he would certainly have tried to verify the factual position by an examination of
the Banno Bir. And this, evidently, he never did. Nor has he, it appeats, examined the Kartarpuri Bir.
Whether or not McLeod was aware of the views of Sahib Singh about the Banno story and of Mahan Singh
and others about the year of completion of the Banno Bir, is not our present concern. It is now well
established that the Banno Bir was prepared not earlier than 1699 and the Banno story is a myth. As such,
the very basis of the argument about the Kartarpuri Bir being a copy of the Banno Bir is knocked out.
McLeod’s argument that the additional bani of Surdas and Ramkali Mahi/a 5 that was present in the Banno
Bir, had been copied in the Kartarpuri Bir, but deleted later on is equally baseless. For, we have seen that in
both these cases the addtional bani in the Banno Bir is either an interpolation or a later writing; and these
verses, which are not present in the Kartarpuri Bir, had neither been copied there nor deleted. Therefore,
McLeod’s other agruments that the Kartarpuri Bir, which according to him had been copied from the Banno
Bir, contained the so-called puberty hymn (additional 8 verses), but being incongruous with the later Khalsa
belief was deleted, is also factually incorrect and fallacious. Kartarpuri Bir which was prepared in 1604 A.D.
could not be copied from the Banno Bir prepared in 1642 A.D.; nor was the puberty hymn originally present
even in the Banno Bir of samat 1699, it being a clear later interpolation. In fact, it was never recorded in the
Kartarpuri Bir. Therefore, the question of its deletion from the Kartarpuri Bir could not arise. Every student
of the Kartarpuri Bir knows that it has the largest number of blank pages and deletions. These two facts are
one of the strongest points in favour of its originality. Apart from the fact that the Banno Bir was prepared
38 years after the Kartarpuri Bir, it is ridiculous that a copyist given the task of copying the Banno Bir
comprising 467 folios, or any Bir with such material as could be accommodated on about 465 leaves, would
copy it out on 974 folios. McLeod knows, since he is aware of the work of Jodh Singh, and has even quoted
it, that in the case of the puberty hymn and bhagat Surdas verses, there is no deletion in the Kartarpuri Bir (as
also seen by us). Yet, knowing all this, he has, on the one hand, tried to build the argument about deletion on
the basis of the use of hartal elsewhere, and, on the other hand, has made the equally misleading argument of
the deletion of the puberty hymn from the Kartarpuri Bir because of the later Khalsa beliefs.
Here it is also pertinent to state that McLeod’s suggestion that the so-called Ramkali hymn was
deleted from the Kartarpuri Bir because of later Khalsa beliefs displays his ignorance both of the history of
the Sikhs and of the Dhirmalias. The latter became a splinter group and they went to the extent of making a
murderous assault on the Ninth Guru. They never recognized him or the Tenth Master as Guru. As such,
there was no love lost between the Khalsa, a creation of the Tenth Guru, whom the Mughals wanted to
destroy, and the Dhirmalias who were Pro-Establishment. Therefore, there is not the remotest possibility
that the Dhirmalias would ever tamper with the Brr in their possession in order to oblige the Khalsa, and
bring it in accord with the Rasit or symbols prescribed by the Tenth Guru. Rather, their avowed hostility
towards the Khalsa would prompt them to highlight the hymn if it had ever existed in that Bir. On the other
hand, the Banno people formed a part of the main-stream of the Sikhs and if Sikhs would have been
interested in a deletion, they might have done that in their Bzr. But, nothing of the sort happened in that Bz.
McLeod’s conjecture about the deletion of the so-called puberty hymn because of the Khalsa beliefs is, thus,
not only impossible, but is also controverted even by the very facts and circumstances of the situation as it
existed then.
Besides, we find that Principal Harbhajan Singh who made a detailed survey of the handwritten Bzrs
in the Sikh Reference Library, Golden Temple, Amritsar, (since destroyed in the Blue Star Attack) and some
other Bzrs, writes that in numerous of the old handwritten Bzrs he examined, this additional bani was no where
present. He gives details of it in his book: Gurbani Sampadan Nirne. A statement about some of them is as
follows :
a Bir No. 97 in the Sikh Reference Library : It was produced in Samat 1739 (1682 A.D.),
some two decades before the creation of the Khalsa, and bears the Néshan of the Ninth
Guru. It has no additional bani as is contained in the Banno Bz. 2. Pindi Lala (Gujrat) Walt
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Bir: It was produced in Samat 1732 (1675 A.D.). It bears the Néshan of Ninth Guru, but,
unlike the Banno Bir, it contains no additional bani. 3. Bir No. 14 in the Sikh Reference
Library : It was completed in Samwat 1748 (1691 A.D.). It contains no additional bani as is
present in the Banno Bir. 4. Ber written by Pakhar Mal Dhillon, grandson of Chaudhri
Langahia Dhillon, a known devout Sikh of the Fifth Guru: It was written, in Samat 1745
(1668 A.D.). Unlike the Banno Bir, it contains no additional bani.”
At Berkeley, McLeod raised two points : “One is the obscurity which envelops a significant period
of the text’s actual history. The other is the presence within the manuscript of numerous deletions.”® On the
issue of deletions we have already found that these large number of deletions are a good proof of its
originality, especially when there is no other Bir with deletions in such a large number and when at most of
those places where bani has been written again by the same scribe, showing thereby that the writing rubbed
off was not correct or approved by the Guru. Actually, it stands established that not only was the Banno Bir
prepared in Samat 1699, but the puberty hymn itself was clearly a later interpolation even in the Banno Bir of
1699. McLeod has been lamenting his frustration in not being able to serve academic interests, because he
was not allowed necessaty access to the Kartarpuri Bir. He even went to the extent of recording that non-
availability of Kartarpuri Bir to him suggested that there was something to conceal therein.’ But one wonders
why his academic keenness never led him to see the Banno Bir, which was available all these years for his
examination. Had he cared to see, he would have found that the year of its production was Samat 1699.
Does all this not suggest that his motives in making unwarranted statements were quite different and
unbecoming a scholar.
In view of the above, it is clear that the suggestion about the Kartarpuri Bir being non-authentic or
its being a copy of the Banno Bir is both baseless and untenable.
On the second issue about the custody of the Kartarpuri Bir, the doubts of McLeod are equally
without any basis. Here, too, the position had been made clear by Mahan Singh. The historical writings
show that Bidhi Chand and other Sikhs were very well aware of the great value of the Bir. They held it in the
highest esteem. Actually, this was the real reason that Bidhi Chand and others, despite the wishes of the
Guru, initially failed to return the Bzr to the Dhirmalias towards whom they were hostile for their having
attacked the Ninth Guru to kill him. Therefore, for understandable reasons, when again directed by the Guru
to return the Bzr, they were reluctant to meet the Dhirmalias face to face. And all they did was that they
deposited the Bz at a safe place and sent a message to the Dhirmalias to pick it up, and this they did.”
Purther, there is little doubt that when the Tenth Guru at Anandpur Sahib wanted to prepare the Damdami
version, it was to the Dhirmalias that he sent the message for loan of the Bir of the Fifth Guru.” So, whatever
be the facts of the earlier part of the story, at the time of the Tenth Guru, the original authentic Bzr was
certainly with the Dhirmalias. After that, the Bir always remained in safe hands. Had the Bzr been lost, it is
imposible to imagine that Ranjit Singh who had waged a war for obtaining a horse, would not be aware of it
and recover this venerable treasure, or that he would be satisfied with a spurious version of the original Ber.
Here it is not our purpose to ascertain whether McLeod made his observations out of sheet
ignorance of the available facts and materials, or of his anxiety to suppress known but awkward facts, or of
his conscious or unconscious bias because of his thirteen years of working and association with a Christian
Mission in Punjab. But in either case, it does little credit to his credibility as a scholar to suggest tampering
with a Scripture without having examined it or the connected literature on the issue. In view of the above, we
conclude that McLeod’s criticism is factually incorrect, and untenable, and even less than responsible.
An observation was made by McLeod that in order to remove scholarly doubts, access to the
Kartarpuri Bir would need to be allowed and “the alternative may well be a growing conviction that there is
something to hide.” The Kartarpuri Bir is private property and we do not hold any brief for its custodians.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
True, the Sodhis of Kartarpur while they do not permit access to every person who claims to be a scholar,
yet, by all standards, their policy to allow access to the Kartarpuri Bir has been very liberal. In fact, during the
current century there has been an extremely profuse exposure of the Kartarpuri Bir before genuine scholars
and theologians. In the twenties, Master Isher Singh of the Sikh Vidyala, Tarn Taran, sent a team of scholars,
who for many months made a detailed page by page and line by line study in order to prepare a standard
version of Guru Granth Sahib. Second, is an equally major attempt of the $.G.P.C. to prepare a meticulously
accurate version of Guru Granth Sahib from the Kartarpuri Bir. A team consisting of two scholars, namely,
Giani Piara Singh Sukhi and Sant Harbhajan Singh Nirmla worked from day to day for six months at
Kartarpur. In addition, other scholars also regularly visited Kartarpur so as to supervise the work of the
team. Leaf by leaf comparison of an unbound Bir of Guru Granth Sahib was made with the Kartarpuri Bir.
Every variation in the unbound Br was corrected in accordance with the Kartarpuri Bir. Thereafter,
calligraphists prepared another faultless copy of the Granth. This having been done, printing blocks of this
new version were made. A committee of scholars was again appointed to verify and approve the corrected
version. Actually, about 733 variations, major or minor, were found in the old printed version and these were
all corrected. Finally, a faultlessly accurate version of Guru Granth Sahib copied from the Kartarpuri Bir was
approved and printed through the Punjabi Press, Hall Bazar, Amritsar. These versions have been printed a
number of times and these printed copies of the Kartarpuri Bir are there for every scholar to see and study.
Dr Jodh Singh’s rejoinder recorded after the publication of McLeod’s lectures states that the printed version
today tallies completely with the Kartarpuri Bir. Apart from that, many times groups of scholars, individual
scholars, both foreign and Indian, have been allowed access to the Kartarpuri Bir. Many reports of the
committees of scholars who examined the Kartarpuri Bir for general and specific purposes are available.
Jodh Singh’s Kartarpuri Bir De Darshan is a detailed page by page record of the Kartarpuri Bir giving an
account of every feature on each page, including variations in words, spellings, /agmatras, use of hartal, blank
spaces, size of margins, obliteration by use of /arfa/, over-writing on harftal, scoring-out, writing in-between
lines, above the lines and in the margins, variations in the size of letters, handwriting, ink, etc., etc.. Among
individual records of examination, these notes by Jodh Singh (recorded by Giani Mahan Singh) are the most
detailed and give a scrupulously accurate picture of the Kartarpuri Bir. In this background, it would be both
unfair and incorrect to blame the custodians of the Bzr that they have barred scholarly study or exposure to
genuine scholars. The difficulty is that wild conjectures of some scholars like G.B. Singh and others have
raised the suspicions of the custodians of the Bir. At present the Kartarpuri Bir is the property of the Dhir
Mal family, and no one can be blamed if the custodians want to be sure of the bonafides of a scholar before
allowing him access to it for a study of the Kartarpuri Bir. Their exercise of such discretion is natural,
understandable and unobjectionable. But, McLeod continued with his misleading and incorrect statements.
In a lecture at Berkeley published in 1978 he said, “The earliest representing nearest approach to Guru
Aryun’s dictation would be Banno, the second an intermediate recension bearing the actual marks of a later
revision through the excision of unaceptable material would be Kartarpuri.””” In 1989, he published his book
The Sikhs, in which he wrote, “This comparision suggests that the Banno recension may actually represent the
original text by Bhai Gurdas”, but he adds, “if this is indeed the case, the original version has subsequently
been amended by obliterating occasional portions of the text.”"" Four Sikh organisations, the Institute of
Sikh Studies, Chandigarh, the Council of Sikh Affairs, Chandigarh, the Academy of Sikh Religion and Culture,
Patiala, and the Khalsa Diwan, Ludhiana, worte to the Toronto University complaining about the misconduct
of McLeod in making wrong statements about the Sikh Scripture, especially when he had made no serious
effort to examine the Banno Bir or the Kartarpuri Bir. Probably, in response to these allegations against him,
McLeod published a letter in the India Abroad, dated 14 December 1990, saying that he had abandoned his
doubts about the Kartarpuri Bir after reading Jodh Singh’s book, Kartarpuri Bir de Darshan. Since McLeod had
made all his incorrect statements of 1975, 1978 and 1989 after accepting knowledge of Jodh Singh’s book in
his publication of 1975, Dr Dhami of New York published all the statements of McLeod suggesting that the
letter of McLeod in the India Abroad was another misstatement by him. All this indicates the level of
scholarship, motivation and ethics at which McLeod has been working.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
So far as the Kartarpuri Bir is concerned, it has since been examined by G.S. Mann of the Columbia
University, USA," and Pashaura Singh of the Toronto University, Canada,!5 and both of them have testified
to its authenticity.
In sum, our analysis and examination of the B/r, the available material on the subject, and the
statements of various authors lead us to the conclusion that the Kartarpuri Bir is incontrovertibly the
authentic Aad Granth prepared by the Fifth Guru.
REFERENCES
1. Sahib Singh : Adi Bir Bare, pp.168,197; Harbhajan Singh : Gurbani Sampadan Nirnai, pp. 137,160.
2. Harbhajan Singh : Gurbani Sampadan Nirnai, pp.130-31, 135, 137-140.
2: Sahib Singh : op.cit., pp. 119-122.
4, McLeod, W.H.: Evolution of the Sikh Community, pp. 76-78.
5: Harbhajan Singh : op. cit., pp.121-126, 128-129.
6. Mark Juergensmegyer, and N.G. Barier, (eds.) : S7kb Studies, Berkeley, 1979, p. 100.
Te Ibid., p. 100.
8. Mahan Singh : Parm Pavitar Adi Bir da Sakalan Kal, pp. 43-44.
9. Harbhajan Singh : op. cit. pp. 135-138.
M. Juergensmegyer, and G. Barier: op. cit., p. 101.
McLeod, W.H. : The Sikhs, Columbia University Press, New York, 1989, p. 88.
Wawley, J.S.and G. S. Mann: Studying the Sikhs, State University of New York Press, 1993.
Pashaura Singh: P2.D. Thesis, Tronto University, 1991, p. 232.
PRP RR
RN ©
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
38
GURUS AND THE BANI — THE BASIC MESSAGE
DALJEET SINGH AND KHARAK SINGH
Some questions which are frequently asked by persons not adequately familiar with Sikh ideology and
history are :
1. Does the bani of the bhagats and bhatts raise any ideological problems, namely, does it accept
Lords Krishna and Rama as avzars 2? And is their religious system binding on the Sikhs ?
2. Is the world-view of the bdhagats, whose bani has been incorporated in Guru
Granth Sahib, binding on the Sikhs ? And, are the bbagats also Gurus for
Sikhs ?
3. Do the references to some stories or Hindu myths mean that the Gurus accept
teir historicity ?
These questions are indeed basic, and are in essence, and by implication, linked with the very
independence and identity of the religion of the Gurus. We shall try to answer these questions in two parts.
The first part deals with the rationale, and the second part with the related hymns.
I
On scrutinising the entire religious history of man, we do not find a single instance, where a
religious system has had more than one prophet. Sikhism has the singular distinction of having ten prophets
with an unrivalled unity of their spiritual thesis, a Scripture authenticated by the Prophet himself, and the
prophets having demonstrated the principles of their religion with their lives and martyrdoms over a period
of about 240 years. The Tenth Guru formally organised the Panth, and gave the Sikhs their Aakkas, declaring
Guru Granth Sahib as their sole Scripture and Guru. Further, he made a complete break with the past by his
Nash doctrine of dharam nash, karam nash, bharam nash, kul nash and krit nash. Vt is indeed painful that we still
find Sikhs quibbling about what is Sikhism and what are its principles and injunctions. The very fact that ten
Gurus have lived and preached with singularity of purpose, their system for 240 years, emphasises three
things : that the traditional systems had ceased to be helpful to the people, that there was need of a new and
independent system; and that their religion was radically so different, that the Gurus had again and again to
demonstrate its principles, so as to explain and bring home to the people the essence of their system. As
such, the Gurus’ lives are of fundamental importance in order to understand their bani. The Guru says,
“Those who know His Will, carry it out” [1, p. 991]. “Wonderful is His Will. If one walks in His Will, then
one knows how to lead the life of Truth” [1, p. 940]. Accordingly, for the understanding and control of our
egoistic consciousness, it is important that we accept the historical lives of the Gurus as a model of those who
are imbued with His Will. It is in this background, and with humility, we approach the issues.
1. The first point to study of the bani of the Gurus is to find if there is any contradiction in it. In
Guru Granth Sahib, there is repeated emphasis on the unity of thought of the Gurus. The very
use of the name Nanak for the hymns of all the Gurus indicates this. Second, there are many
hymns of bhatts which declare the different Gurus one in spirit [1, p. 966]. Third, there is the
statement of the Tenth Guru that there can be no spiritual understanding or success, unless the
unity of spirit of all the Gurus is realised [2, p. 295].
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
As to Vaishnavism, the system of Lords Rama and Krishna, even a casual student of religion knows
that their system and Sikhism belong to different categories of religion, and that in most of their basic
principles they are poles apart. Vaishnavism is a salvation religion that believes in monasticism, sanyasa,
withdrawal, celibacy, downgrading of women, abimsa and rigid adherence to the caste ideology in the
empirical field. For, it is unquestioned that Lord Rama cut the head of Shambuka, a Sudra, for having
violated the caste prohibition against the study of Vedas by a Sudra. Similarly, Lord Krishna proclaims that
he is the creator of the four varnas, and that it is more meritorious for a Sudra to follow, even though
inefficiently, the duties of his own caste, than for him to do efficiently the duties of another caste. Sikhism
does not accept any of these principles. Besides, the Gurus clearly reject avtarbood, by calling God Ajuni (who
does not incarnate). The Fifth Guru says, “cursed be the mouth that states God incarnates” [1, p. 1136].
Therefore, the ideology of Lords Rama and Krishna has no relevance for us, nor can they be regarded as Sikh
Gurus. All this emphasises the independence of Sikhism and explains clearly where we have to seek and
search for the truths laid down by the Gurus, namely, in their bani as lived by them.
1. A considerable part of what we have said above, is also relevant in giving the answer to the
second question, namely, whether the world-view of the bhagats whose bani is in Guru Granth
Sahib, is binding on us. There is little doubt that the bhagats had variant faiths. For the Muslim
saints, Qoran and the Islamic Shariat were binding and Prophet Mohammad was the seal of
prophets. Similarly, the Hindu Vaishnavites like Jaidev and Ramanand, believed in sanyasa, caste,
ritualism, celibacy, downgrading of women, ahbimsa, etc. It is well-known that Ramanuja, the
chief exponent of Vaishnavism, would not admit a woman as a Vaishnava [3, pp. 201-202].
Bhagats like Namdev, Kabir and others, had their own separate ideologies. Without meaning any
criticism, all these saints were quietists, and had faith in withdrawal and abimsa, and they did not
believe in the equality of man and woman. Without going into details, it can be broadly affirmed
that the bhagats were quietist saints in the sense that none of them accepted social responsibility,
or advocated the use of force for a righteous cause of as resistance against aggression, nor did
they organise any society or Panth.
All students of religion know that there is a clear demarcation between whole-life religions and what
may be called quietist or salvation systems. In the whole-life religions of Judaism, as laid down by Moses, or
Islam, as laid down by Prophet Mohammad, or of Sikhism, as lived by the Gurus, a householdet’s life is
accepted, as also social responsibility, for the discharging of which a society is organised. The use of
minimum force to help the weak and oppressed is sanctioned. For over a period of a hundred years, five
Gurus have demonstratively wielded the sword for righteous causes, and a sword has been prescribed as one
of the kakkas for a Sikh. It is well-known that monasticism, sanyasa, celibacy, withdrawal, a lower status of
woman, and non-violence, are integral values in quietist systems. The Gurus prescribe complete equality
between man and woman, social responsibility, both for the sustenance of life, involving work and fair
distribution of wealth, and confrontation of those who oppress or are unjust to the weak. In Sikhism, these
are essential values. In a whole-life system, apart from the sanction of force for a righteous cause, the
prophets organised societies, since social and political aggression cannot be resisted by individuals. It is
extremely relevant and meaningful that whereas quietist prophets, saints or mystics only cater for individual
salvation, whole-life religions lay down not only the spiritual principles of their systems, but simultaneously
organise a Panth or society, as did the Sikh Gurus. The world over, no quietist saint has ever recommended
the use of force for a righteous cause. This clear distinction between quietist systems and whole-life systems,
with marked differences in their values, goals, ethics, approach to life and social responsibilities is too bold,
glaring and well-known to be disregarded by any student of religion. In a whole-life religion, the love of God
and the love of man are virtually synonymous. Thus, the love of man involves succour and sacrifice for those
who are weak, oppressed, or discriminated against. For, “God showers His Grace where the weak are
helped,” [1, p. 15] and Guru Nanak’s God destroys the ‘evil’ and the ‘demoniacal’ [1, pp. 224, 1228]. In
Japuji Sabib, the execution of the Altruistic Will of God is the goal prescribed by Guru Nanak [1, p. 1].
Hence, in Sikhism, neither withdrawal, nor celibacy, nor ahimsa has been recommended as inviolable values.
Again, it is Guru Nanak who complains to God, when there is oppression and butchery of the weak, meaning
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
thereby that injustice and oppression violate the Order of God, and that the gurmukh cannot remain neutral ot
unconcerned about it. Sikh history is a clear and classic demonstration of the role God-conscious men have
to play when oppression in society is rampant.
Undeniably, the world-view of the bsagars is different from that of the Gurus. Accordingly, as in the
case of Lords Rama and Krishna, the question of Sikhs accepting their ideologies, outside Guru Granth
Sahib, cannot arise. It is unthinkable that having started a new society and demonstrated their ideology, they
would in their bani confuse us, or ask the Sikhs to follow systems which were well-known to be different.
For, if the earlier ideologies had to be accepted, the entire Sikh history of the Gurus’ period would become
without purpose or aim. In fact, to us, the very suggestion of any identity with earlier systems would seem to
be irrational and self-contradictory. Often, it is our own failure to understand the difference, or our
incapacity to follow the Sikh path that creates the confusion. It is evident that the Gurus neither ask us to
accept the variant and old ideologies, nor have they involved any contradiction by the inclusion of the bhagat
bani. The bhagat bani in Guru Granth Sahib is a selection. It is a fact that most of the bhagat bani is outside
Guru Granth Sahib, and expresses variant ideologies. The hymns of the bhagats were selected by the Guru to
the extent that the ideas they convey were considered by the Guru to be congruous with their own bani. This
is clear from the connected commentaries of the Gurus on those hymns, where they felt there could be a
possibility of misunderstanding.
Just as it is unknown in human history to have ten successive prophets of a religion, it is equally
unknown for a prophet to include the bani of another system in its own scripture. There is a reason for so
doing. Sikhism is universal and non-exclusive in its approach. For that reason, it gives due respect to other
systems, and is willing to co-operate with them. Ecumenical efforts or approach among religions is a very
recent or modern phenomenon. But, Guru Nanak in S7dh Gosht clearly proclaims that his mission in life is,
with the help of other God-conscious men, to steer man across the sea of life. It is in that spirit and with that
putpose in view that the Fifth Guru has included the hymns of bhagats in Guru Granth Sahib. It does not at
all mean an identity of ideologies; but, it is a step for co-ordination and co-operation with like-minded bhagats.
Pir Budhu Shah sacrificed his sons for the righteous mission of the Tenth Guru, but that did not mean that
he had lost faith in Islam or Prophet Mohammad. Therefore, the inclusion of the bani of bhagats is an
ecumenical measure indicating the presence of like-minded strands in other faiths, thereby requiring the Sikhs
to be co-operative and universal in their approach. This is the context which explains that when the Sikhs got
power, there was no attempt at conversion or persecution of the Muslims.
Thus, while all reverence is due to bhagats and prophets of other religions, it would obviously be
contrary to the bani of the Gurus and their lives, if we either call them God-incarnate or the Gurus of the
Sikhs. While everything in Guru Granth Sahib is bani, the Gurus of the Sikhs are only the Ten Masters and
Guru Granth Sahib, who represent a complete unity of spirit, thought, and deed.
2. The third question is about the Hindu myths and stories which find mention in Guru Granth
Sahib. Without meaning any disrespect to anyone, it is known that Ramayana and Mahabharata
are among the great epics of the world in which most of the stories are mythical and have hardly
any historicity. And, yet, these stories being current, have their values for the purpose of
clarifying religious propositions, and making them linguistically understandable to the people
who were conversant with them and the concerned idiom. Their reference is mostly symbolic,
idiomatic, metaphoric or allegoric, and involves no acceptance of their historical reality. For
example, the Gurus who repeatedly goad man to make moral decisions with a view to spiritual
progress, certainly deny the concept of the determined fall or regression, from safyug to Ralyug. In
fact, they clearly convey the idea of evolution in their hymns, “God created first Himself, then
haumain, third maya, and fourth the higher state of a gurmukh who lives truthfully.” Therefore,
references to myths and stories do not, by implication or otherwise, accept their historical truth,
or their literal meaning. All great teachers of the world have made use of the current myths,
parables and stories to bring home to the people the truth of what they wanted to convey, which
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
otherwise would have been difficult for the people to understand. In literature, and more
especially in moral literature, where the purpose is to motivate and condition the emotions of the
people, an effective means is by reference to examples, parables and tales, which are within the
ken and experience of the masses. The stories in Panch Tantra and George Orwell’s Animal Farm
are tales of animals depicted to express human thoughts, sentiments, viles, failings and foibles.
The importance of the stories is in the lessons they seek to bring home, and not in their
historical or literal truth.
Guru Nanak’s system was so radical, new and independent, that the Gurus felt that mere expression
and communication of their doctrines in the bani could be misunderstood. Had this not been Gurus Nanak’s
assumption, there would hardly seem to be need for subsequent Gurus and their historical roles over the
centuries. Actually, it is Guru Nanak in his spirit who has lived for 240 years. The Gurus very well felt that
in view of the thousands of years old Indian tradition of sanyasa, monasticism, celibacy, downgrading of
women, ahimsa, etc., it would not be enough to bring home to the people their revolutionary system by
merely laying it down in a Granth. The fact is that even after the compilation of Adi Granth, five Gurus
lived, kept armies, struggled and were martyred for over a hundred years. Later, the prescribing of a Rirpan as
a kakka tepresents a spiritual principle or a truth in the Sikh theology. It cannot be treated as a redundant
remnant of what was once necessary.
The real difficulty is the human tendency to misconstrue, especially because of our own prejudices.
It is for this reason that Guru Nanak, who lived in spirit for almost two and a half centuries, had to
demonstrate its meanings and implications. The &irpan represents the principle of social responsibility,
including struggle against injustice and oppression. By their examples and sacrifices, the Gurus have
explained when and to what extent the &/rpan or force is to be used. Had the Gurus not done it, the position
could be the same as in the case of the Hindu scriptures, which are so variantly interpreted by K. Bhatt,
Sankara, Ramanuja, Nimbarka, Madhava, Vallabha and Swami Dayanand. It was to avoid such a state, that
the Gurus lived to demonstrate the meaning of their bani.
II
We have emphasised that by losing sight of the historical perspective and hastening to go by the
literal interpretation, we may so often miss the very meaning of the bani. For this reason, the lives of the
Gutus ate of fundamental importance, so as to enable us to understand the real import of the words of the
Gurus. For example, in Asa di Var, the Guru sings :
“Sache tere Rhand sache brahmand,
Sache tere loe sache akar.”
And again :
“Kur raja kur parja kur sabb sansar.”
To some, the two views might appear contradictory. In fact, they complement each other,
contributing to a balanced world-view. The former regards the world as real, and pleads for responsible
participation in its affairs. The latter reminds one of its evanescent natute to deprecate accumulation of
power and wealth. The goal of life, prescribed by Guru Nanak in Japuji, is to carry out the Altruistic Will of
God. This is properly understood only if we carefully study the lives of the Gurus, and see how they worked,
struggled and made supreme sacrifices for the achievement of this goal. The Tenth Guru, almost from his
childhood, was engaged in an intense strife involving pressures, anguish and tragedies of unprecedented
magnitude, which would have crushed the spirit of any individual not inspired by that lofty goal. In the
context of such an intense struggle, it would be naive to conclude that the Gurus considered life to be mithya
ot false and unreal. In the absence of a close study of the lives of the Gurus, it is not possible to be clear
about so many subtle nuances and depths of the bani. Hence, the fundamental importance of the exemplary
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
lives of the Gurus in Sikh hermeneutics. The bani says that those who know His Will, carry it out. It was His
Altruistic Will that the Gurus were following in their lives.
It is in this background that we study the place of Lord(s) Rama, Krishna, and other gods and
goddesses in Sikhism. In Asa di Var, the Guru writes that God alone is without fear, and that there are
innumerable deities like Rama, as insignificant as the dust of His feet, numerous being the stories of Krishna
[1, p. 464]. We need hardly labour the point. But, students of Guru Granth Sahib know what is the status of
gods and goddesses in Gurbani, as well as in the hymns of the bhagats Namdev and Kabir [1, pp. 637, 894, 953,
954]. Many a time the word Ram or Morar in the bani only means God, and not any individual of that name.
And, wherever there is a story of any Grace having been bestowed in response to any prayer, the Guru’s real
reference, despite the mention of a human name in the story, is to God’s power, or His benevolent response
to prayer. For example, the Ninth Guru, while referring to God’s or Ram’s graciousness in response to the
prayer of Daropadi, writes, “Panchali ko raj sabha mein Ram Nam sudb aa’ [1. p, 1008]. Evidently, the incident
relates to the story of Lord Krishna and Daropadi. But, for the Guru the grace bestowed is by God, here
named Ram. The absence of the word Krishna is very significant. It shows that statements in Gurbani of
incidents of grace, as narrated in the current stories or myths, neither confirm their historicity, nor confine
their meanings to particular individuals named therein, but those seek only to explain to the devotee the
power of God through the medium of myths, parables or idioms with which he is familiar. In sum, both in
the bani of the Gurus and that of the bhagats, the Power which answers the prayer, or is Gracious, is, in each
case, God, and not any living being.
A related question could arise regarding the bani of bhatts. They want to praise and describe the
Gurus as the greatest beings of all times. They regarded the av/ars as the greatest they knew of. Accordingly,
they use the then current idiom to extol the Gurus by calling them greater than anyone in any age. Their
comparison with the mythical persons does not indicate, much less establish, the historicity of Janak, Paras
Ram or the rest. For, bhatt Kall sings that Jogeshwar, Paras Ram with the mythical axe, many avsars, Kapil,
Janak, Bidar, Mahadeo and others of all ages, are ever singing praises of Guru Nanak [1. pp. 1389-90]. This is
just a poetic or allegoric way of expressing the bhait’s belief in the lofty stature of the Guru. It does not at all
mean the historicity of the persons mentioned, nor that those who lived in ages gone by, were still living and
singing the praises of the Gurus. Everyone knows the mythical character of Paras Ram and his axe, which is
supposed to have killed all the &shatriyas in the land.
Now, a few words about Kabir Sahib’s hymn, “Eve aurat mardan saje eh sabha rup tumhare; Kabir pungra
Ram Allah ka sabh gur pir hamare.” The hymn ends with the words, “Kewal naam japo re prani tab hi nehchai tarna?
[1. p. 1349]. We wonder how a serious student who has gone through the entire shabad (which emphasises
the immanence of God and salvation only through Naam) can conclude that the hymn means that everyone
(which includes Sakhi Sarvar, Sitla Devi, Gugga Pir, and thousands of other devis and devias, preaching diverse
cults) is the guru or pir of a Sikh. It is the same Kabir who writes, “Kabir Brahmin guru hai jagat ka, bhagatan ka
gur nahi? \\. p. 1377].
Equally unsustainable appears to be the observation “I do not consider any difference between Guru
Nanak, Guru Gobind Singh, Krishna, Rama, Jesus or Mohammad, because they give me the message of the
Lord.” The statement could be only partly true, since the message in each case is not identical. For Guru
Nanak, his Lord is also the Destroyer of the evil-doer, and the Sikh Gurus wielded the sword for 102 years,
and a kirpan is prescribed as a part of the essential wear of every Sikh. Whereas the Sikh Guru prays to God
to save the burning world by any way He may be gracious enough to do, the Christian message is of salvation
only through Christ, and the Sermon on the Mount is strictly pacificist. Islam also shares this exclusivism.
Similarly, Lord Krishna claims to be the author of the caste ideology, involving strict adherence to one’s caste
duties and prohibition against any mobility in caste profession. Logically, it gives sanction to the concept of
pollution. It requires purification of a temple after a Sudra has happened to visit it, or the washing of the
statue of Sampurananand with holy Ganges water after Jagjivan Ram, a scheduled caste Deputy Prime
Minister of India, had unveiled it. The statement may be a good speech from a political platform. However,
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
it is difficult to identify the ideology of the Gurus with the earlier preachings of shastras and other scriptures,
and thus, to uphold the claim. Of course, respect for all religious leaders and scriptures is understandable,
and has been amply demonstrated in the banz.
CONCLUSION
In the end, we should again like to re-emphasise the very special position of Sikh hermeneutics. We
humans have no access to the actual spiritual experience of the Gurus, nor can we be aware of the
deliberation consequent to that experience in the consciousness of the prophets. We are distantly aware only
of the expression of the decisions made by the prophets. The expression is either in the form of words or
deeds. Here comes the major difference. In the case of almost every other system, the scripture is a post-
facto man-made construction, recorded decades or even centuries after the disappearance of the prohpets.
Debate has continued as to how far the record could be true, considering the known human weaknesses to
remain subservient to personal or social influences. This handicap does not exist in the case of Guru Granth
Sahib, which stands authenticated by the Guru himself. The second point is that expression in the form of
deeds has always been considered clearer than words. This is for two important reasons. The expression in
words can at best be general or theoretical in nature. For, this expression for that very reason, must seek to
cover all possible eventualities that may arise in the future, and which possibilities can never be guessed
completely. In short, word is only the penultimate step in the expression of the spiritual perceptions of which
the deed is a concrete, unambiguous and final step in a comparatively specific flux of events. For this reason,
it is easier to understand and less liable to misinterpretation than the word. The second point about the word
is that it is a borrowed mode of expression and for that matter, it can never be as clear and concrete as the
deed. Language, at any time, is already an existing vehicle of expression. It has its own changing nuances and
has its roots extending many a time to a distant cultural past. Obviously, language being a second-hand
vehicle of expression, its truth is more liable to misinterpretation than the deed which is not only particular to
the author, but is also closely related as a response to known or identifiable set of events. For this reason, it is
simpler and easier to comprehend.
In the above context, let us see what Guru Nanak did for us to reduce all possibilities of
misunderstanding or misinterpretation. In the case of the words, the Guru himself authenticated them. As to
the clearly understandable expression of deeds, Guru Nanak lived for us for 240 years. He lived, worked,
struggled, organised a Panth, sacrificed and was martryed, while facing all sets of events, eventualities and
milieus, social and political. The above are the two unique steps Guru Nanak has taken to make his system
clear to us and to solve our problems of hermeneutics.
REFERENCES
1. Guru Granth Sahib.
2. Macauliffe. M.A. : The Sikh Religion , Vol. V.
3. Murthy. H.V.S. : Vaisnavism of Shankradeva and Ramanuja.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
i
TWO VIEWS ON DASAM GRANTH
GURTEJ SINGH
Ever since its compilation near about the fourth decade of the eighteenth century, authorship of the
greater part of the Dasam Granth’ has been fiercely disputed by scholars. That was in spite of the great
prestige undoubtedly enjoyed by Bhai Mani Singh, to whom the original compilation was cleverly attributed.
Even the contemporaries of the Guru held different views and objected to its compilation in one volume
which hinted at single authorship. Within a decade, a strong sentiment in favour of dismembering it swelled
up within the Panth. Decision in favour of its being kept in one volume was at best an interim one, made in a
2 7
great hurry. It was also a result of a pure chance. The controversy having been thus swept under the carpet,
has never since been seriously addressed. Had the majority’s view been accepted then for maintaining it in
the form of different volumes, as originally intended, it would have automatically solved the problem of
authorship as the Guru’s compositions were well-known. In this ongoing controversy, an attempt will be
ae ad 4 5
made to assess the value of the contributions of Dr D.P. Ashta’ and Dr Rattan Singh Jaget, who are
prominent representatives of the two views on the subject of authorship.
At the outset, it may be mentioned that there is no controversy regarding the authorship of Jap, Akal
Ustat (except from verses 201 to 230) and Swayyias.” These portions of the Dasam Granth are indisputably
accepted as compositions of the Tenth Guru. It may also be observed that, strangely enough, both schools
of thought appear to share the belief that whatever is written by the Tenth Guru, would #pso facto constitute a
part of Sikh canon. The root-cause of the controversy is this underlying assumption, though it is clearly
unsustainable. Since its compilation, Guru Granth Sahib is the only Sikh canon.
Though outwardly attempting to ward off the vital assumption by adopting an innocuous title for his
work, Ashta is clearly drawing conclusions which are possible only if the entire Dasam Granth is accepted as
canon. In the preface, he indicates that the Dasam Granth, “has a very important place in Sikh ...... theology”
and decrees it an “excellent evidence of influence exercised by Hindu theology, mythology, philosophy,
ao7
history and literature in the life and activities of Guru Gobind Singh.” It is this baseless assumption which
is fully revealed in the Foreword by S. Radhakrishnan who further widens the scope of the author’s
formulations to assert, “from a study of this work, we learn the profound influence which Hindu tradition
and mythology has had on the development of the Sikh religion” and that, “Ashta’s work ...... is exposition of
the teachings of the 10th Sikh Guru, Shri Gobind Singh.” True import of the short foreword is that there is
need of accepting “a religion which is spiritual and non-sectarian” (that is Hinduism) in prefernce to a
“sectarian view” (that is Sikhism). This work aims at making it easier for the Sikhs to accept the suggested
transformation.
This underlying objective manifests itself in several subtle and not so subtle ways in Ashta’s work.
Quite often, he insinuates that the Sikh views are borrowed by the Gurus from Hindu bhagats. His statement
that Guru Gobind Singh, “like other Hindu thinkers ...... uses negatives in describing Him” is repudiated in
the same breath “confessing” that “to him God was not a mere abstraction.” It is indicative of the origin he
would like to place on Sikh thought. That desire must explain another insinuation that the ideal of the
transmigration of the soul in Sikhism is ultimately inspired by Upanishads and Bhagwatgita. This statement is
made in the full knowledge of the Guru’s clear injunction that, ‘they who forsaking me adopt the ways of
Veds and Swrities, shall fall into the pit of hell.” Ashta goes to absurd lengths while pursuing this course.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
For instance, he seriously holds that even the satire of Guru Nanak and Guru Gobind Singh is borrowed
from Ramanand and Kabir.”
The self-created predicament obliges Ashta to take up untenable positions again and again. To bring
the philosophy of Sikhism in unison with that of the Hindu bhagats, particularly Kabir, he states that the
Gurus believed in Kabir’s Nirguna Brahma.” While imposing “vishishtadvaita position” on the Sikh Gurus, he
asserts that their God is “above ...... worldly entanglements.” Nothing could be further from the truth.
Facts, however, stare him in the face and he has to conclude that according to the Guru, “God is
: 15 : : : : 16
omnipotent as love. © ...... God is sublimest Love. He loves his creation.”’ He also accepts whole-heartedly
the basic truth of the Sikh religion that, “God is Himself the Creator, the Preserver and Destroyer, all in
one.” God of Sikhism is also accepted by him to be “the Punisher of the evil.” Surprisingly, in spite of all
these realisations, he does not feel compelled to revise his earlier formulations regarding the mirguna, the
vishishtadvaita and the non-involved nature wrongly attributed to God in Sikhism. He holds on to both points
of view, though he himself has effectively refuted one.
Apart from the fact that he contradicts himself, he betrays ignorance of the overall position of Sikh
theology and history which has always been clear to serious students. Discerning minds have always realised
that the Kabirpanthis are “virtually submerged under the tide of Hinduism.” In comparison, it is recognised
that Guru Nanak’s teachings conspicuously tended towards and eventually ended up providing “an entirely
new environment which called for the reforms introduced by Guru Gobind Singh, while other medieval
reformers ...... created sects which were swallowed up by Hinduism.””” In view of the above, it must be said
of Ashta that he ventures forth to study the Dasam Granth with a definite premeditated design in mind. That
obliges him to give up objectivity and he abandons it without a second thought. It is, therefore, no surprise
that he fails to see the significance of Guru Gobind Singh’s formal recognition of Adi Guru Granth as the only
Sikh canon. He also does not realise that the Tenth Master persistently refused to collect his compositions in
a single volume and under a common heading. This approach also explains why Ashta enthusiastically
accepts Ram, Shyam and Kal to be the pseudonyms” of Guru Gobind Singh on absolutely flimsy grounds.
This is in spite of the fact that a previously existing work of Baba Sumer Singh testifies to the independent
: : 7 : : : 21
existence of these poets as pointed out by Jaggi. Jaggi has gone into the same question more deeply and has
F 22 ‘ :
not only noticed, Shyam™ amongst the court poets of Guru Gobind Singh, but has also succeeded in
unearthing some of their compositions which are not a part of the Dasam Granth.
In order to establish the authorship of the Tenth Guru, Ashta repeatedly asserts that the poet of the
Dasam Granth “does not believe in incarnations, gods or goddesses of Hindu or Mohemmadan religious
books.”” That he also often contradicts himself” goes without saying. It is left to Jaggi to effectively bring
out that several contributors to the Dasam Granth do regard goddesses, gods and incarnations” as objects of
worship. Jaggi’s argument that, therefore, the Guru is not the author of the bulk of it is more rational and
cannot be controverted as it proceeds on the same basic premise as accepted by Ashta. It is strange how the
deliberate non-use of “Nanak”, the legitimate name of Guru Gobind Singh, in the Dasam Granth has not been
noticed either by Ashta or by Jaggi. They have not worked out the implications of that ommission. Another
: ee : : os : 26 :
fact that has been neglected is that the Guru insisted upon excluding his writings from the Adi Granth.” It is
also quite significant that the entire schemata or grammatical representations used in the Adi Granth are
almost completely missing from the Dasam Granth." The significance of the fact that this book was originally
known as Bachittar Natak Granth and has travelled arduously towards the present title has also been missed
both by Ashta and Jaggi. These facts alone are sufficient to convince any scholar that Guru Gobind Singh
did not wish to interfere with the previously settled Sikh canon beyond adding his father’s (the Ninth Nanak)
compositions to it.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
In addition, the conclusion sought to be drawn by Ashta and emphasised by Dr Radhakrishnan, can
only be sustained if the internal incongruities of the Hindu religious system are effectively ignored. Whatever
may have been the earlier position, their gods were so jealous of each other as to promote mutual contempt
amongst their mutually exclusive followers. “In all these respects, Puranas and Tantras were especially
instrumental, and they not only taught their followers to assert the unapproachable superiority of gods they
worshipped, but inspired them with feelings of animosity towards those who presumed to dispute that
>
28 : : : s : ;
supremacy...” Consideration of this aspect alone rules out any single authorship for the narration of
vatious incarnations included in the Dasam Granth. Though in passing, Jagei has at least noticed” the
difficulty presented by such inclusions. They include the incarnations worshipped by Vaishnavites, Shaivites,
Sakats, Sanyasis, Jogis and even Muslims, for, Mir Mehdi is also amongst them. Seven incarnations of
Brahma ate also included. In the context of the times in which it is written, it could only have been
composed by several authors having differing views of Reality. This also explains the existence of at least
three versions of the story of Chandi in the Dasam Granth.
Ashta’s convenient argument that, “the diction, the rhythm and vigour of the lines are peculiarly
Guru Gobind Singh’s own””’ sounds hollow when, in the latter part of his thesis, he compares the poetry of
the Dasam Granth with that of other poets and hints that it is in strong measure influenced and inspired by the
type of the diction, rhythm and vigour commonly found in the poetic compositions of the age. This
argument is further developed by Jaggi. He concludes that the poetry of most of the Dasam Granth is
conventional and of common occurrence. He further states that most of the poets composing it exhibit
themselves as humble supplicants who often pray for favours from their patron and seek forgiveness for the
possible mistakes — living in constant dread that those would be detected and be laughed at.
Jaggi, on the other hand, has proceeded scientifically and objectively. He has clearly delineated in
detail the views of both parties to the controversy and has then set out to examine them thoroughly. His
logic is scathing and whatever cannot stand scrutiny is discarded without hesitation. This constitutes the first
three chapters of his present work. His scrutiny of the letter attributed to Bhai Mani Singh is quite thorough.
One would wish that he had gone into the circumstances in which it was discovered. It is well worth
knowing whether G.B. Singh discovered it when he was in the thick of the controversy about the authorship
of the Dasam Granth stirred up mostly by G.B. Singh himself. It would also be relevant to know whether
serious aspersions cast on the integrity and objectivity of G.B. Singh by Bhai Sahib Singh” are valid and
whether any conclusion on that basis is warranted in the present context ?
The fourth and fifth chapters deal with the four well-known manuscripts of the Dasam Granth. After
incisive enquiry done with extreme care, Jaggi comes to the conclusion that there are material differences in
the four versions. These sometimes extend to including additional works not usually associated with the
book.” He notices that the material put together represents diverse and scattered writings completely lacking
a common theme. The conclusion that it would have been more homogeneous, had the Guru intended to
put it in one volume is entirely warranted. The other conclusion that it was not compiled during the Guru’s
lifetime is obvious (It is only in the early nineteenth century Sikh literature that we find first mention of the
volume). The very fact that such liberties have been taken by different compilers, clearly indicates that no
particular sanctity was attached to the compilation. There is thus no doubt that it was not considered by
35
them to be the Guru’s word.”
An analysis of the portions supposedly in the handwriting of the Guru himself has been done with
characteristic thoroughness by Jaggi. These pages have mostly been pasted later into the volumes pointing
unmistakably to the very late origin of the compilations. It is also pointed out that these are often materially
inaccurate which totally rules out their being written by the Guru.” Commonly used local script has been
used for writing these pages. It is wrong to advertise it as the Guru’s peculiar invention. Jaggi approvingly
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
quotes Giani Gian Singh’s assertion that these pages are forgeries made by Charat Singh, son of Sukha Singh,
author of the Gurbilas. That perhaps reflects the true position.
Two chapters have been devoted by Jaggi to the analysis of the ideology of the rest of the Dasam
Granth. By comparing it with the known writings of the Tenth Guru, he has conclusively shown that the two
are poles apart. In this connection, it is highly significant that meat eating, drinking of alcohol and sex
indulgence are profusely inducted in some writings, which are translations of other texts. This is in spite of
the fact that the original texts of which these are translations, do not mention such activity. That to Jaggi
reasonably reveals an interested Sakat’s hand in the composition. Serious anachronisms, which would
discredit any ordinary man of moderate learning, have been pointed out.
Concluding it can be stated without fear of contradiction that, in comparison, Jaggi’s thesis is well-
authenticated and balanced. Ashta, on the other hand, appears to be too keen to adopt a particular point of
view. He is not thorough in his analysis, is quite often self-contradictory, and appears eager to gloss over
material facts which are inconvenient and do not support his own point of view. On the whole, his work
appeats quite lacking in objective inquiry. If we relate it to the conclusions drawn from it by Dr
Radhakrishnan, we cannot say that it is devoid of a motive or a predisposed desire to conform to certain pre-
determined notions related to the position of Sikhs in the Indian polity.
REFERENCES
1. To begin with it was known as Bachitter Natak or Bachittar Natak Granth, then by various
names including Dasam Patshah ka Granth until it was finally christened as Dasam Granth in
this century.
2. Bhai Sukha Singh and Mehtab Singh, who passed through Damdama Sahib on their way to
punish Massa Ranghar, desecrator of the Harimandar, proposed that it should be kept in one
volume if they succeeded and returned, but should be kept separate if they died in the
attempt. They were successful and returned.
See Kahan Singh, Bhai, Mahan Kosh (Pbi) (Reprint) Bhasha Vibhag, Patiala, 1974, 616.
3: Ibid., 616.
4. Ashta, Dr Dharam Pal, The Poetry of the Dasam Granth, Arun Prakashan, New Delhi, pp. 312
+ XXXXVIII + iv.
3: Jagei, Dr Rattan Singh, Dasam Granth Da Kartritay (Pbi), Punjabi Sahit Sabha, New Delhi,
1966, pp. 237 + 1.
6. See conclusion by Jaggi, Dr Rattan Singh, loc. cit. p., 198. Jaggi has apparently kept his
options open by using the word etc., at the end of his list.
7. Dr Ashta, loc. cit. X.
8. Ibid., VI.
2. Ibid., VII.
10. Ibid., 187.
11. Ibid., 188.
12. Ibid., 205-206.
13. Ashta, op. cit., 169.
14. Ibid., 171.
15. Ibid., 175.
16. Ibid., 178.
17. Ibid., 176 also “God not only creates but also provides for the sustenance of all” p. 180.
18. Ibid., 182.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
19.
20.
21,
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
3D:
30.
37.
38.
Banerjee, A.C., Guru Nanak and Problems of his Age, Journal of Religious Studies,
Vol.No.September1,1969, 45.
Ashta, op. cit., pp. 13-15.
Jaggi, Dr Rattan Singh, op. cit., pp. 21-22 see Appendix 3, and pp. 47 to 58.
Ibid., 173-175.
Ashta, op. cit, pp. 21-22.
Jaggi, op. cit., pp. 176-194.
The Sikh position is ably summed up by Mohsin Fani, a comtemporary of Guru Hargobind.
See Ganda Singh’s translation in The Panjab Past and Present, Vol. UI, Punjabi University,
Patiala, 1969, 5, wherein he says, ‘disciples of Nanak condemn idol worship ...... they do not
read the mantras of Hindus, They do not ...... esteem their Avtars.’
‘Guru did not allow it to be incorporated in the Adi Granth, Chhibber, Kesar Singh,
“Bansavalinama,” Parakh, Panjab University, Chandigarh 1972.
For instance, had the system been followed, ¢k chun chun jharon kadian 11. Chandi-di-var, would
have been written as : ikki chuni chuni jharon Radian. cf. Gurdit Singh, Giani, Shabdantik
Lagan Matran, Singh Sabha Patrika, August 1990, Chandigarh, 18.
Wilson, H.H., Religious Sects of The Hindus, (1861), (Reprint) Susil Gupta (India) Private
Limited, Calcutta, 1958, 2.
A passing reference by Jaggi, op. cit., 181. Padam, Piatra Singh, Dasam Granth Darshan, (Pbi.)
Patiala April 1990, 81 is aware that no other work which includes these diverse incarnations,
exists. Referring to love for Krishna, Ashta does affirm that “their devotion was so much
that they could do away with all their deities and be devoted to him exclusively” Ashta, op.
cit., p. 77.
Ibid., p. 168.
The following extracts are from Ashta, op. cit. :
“In the Dasam Granth, also descriptions of nature fall within this conventional category” p.
297.
“This form of poetry from the beginning of Hindi literature even to this day is still being
attempted. The treatment is more or less conventional.” p. 299.
“tees here too Guru Gobind Singh has employed the conventional style.” p. 301.
He considers Gian Parbodh to be “an attempt at revival of the epic philosophy.” p. 305.
“Bachitra Natak Granth follows the Puranic tradition ......” p. 306.
“The poetry of the Dasam Granth, like the Hindi poetry of the day has several elements of
conventionality in it.” p. 307. See also pp. 308, 309.
“In war poetry, Bhushan’s Shivraj Bhushan, Shiva Bhawani and Chhatarsal Dasak get the
precedence of Dasam Granth in time as well as in epic quality.” p. 309.
“In variety of meter, Dasam Granth ranks next only to works of Keshavdas. ...... ” pb. 310.
Jaggi, op. cit., pp. 166-168.
Cf. Sahib Singh, Ad Bir Bare, Singh Brothers, Amritsar, February, 1970, pp. 110-118.
Jaggi, Rattan Singh, op. cit., pp. 98-99.
Ibid., pp. 112, 125, 126.
Ibid., pp. 121, 138, 139.
Ibid., p. 151.
Ibid., p. 164.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
40
DASAM GRANTH — ITS HISTORY
DALJEET SINGH
INTRODUCTION
Since the time the writings or pothis, to be later compiled and called the granth of the Tenth Master,
were originally found, there has been a controversy about their authorship, authenticity and historicity. Very
few persons have made a serious study about their genuineness. The issue is important, and writers like
O’Connell and others have often made accusations like : “A conspicuous deficiency already mentioned is the
general reluctance to grapple effectively with the Dasam Granth. The period whence it comes is absolutely
crucial, and until it is adequately treated, we shall continue to grope in our efforts to trace the course of Sikh
history or development of Sikh tradition.” It is, therefore, necessary to assess the veracity of facts, and to
indicate the probabilities of the issue, so that it is understood in its right academic perspective.
HISTORY — 18TH CENTURY CHHIBBER’S STORY
Most of the evidence about the present work called the ‘Dasam Granth’ is negative. The earliest
reference about some writings by the Tenth Master is by Chhibber in his Bansavalinama. Contemporary
historians of the period of Guru Gobind Singh like Sainapat, Bhai Nandlal, Chaupa Singh, Sewadas, Koer
Singh or Bhai Mani Singh, make no mention of the Dasam Granth or any such writing in the period. This
negative evidence is quite significant and strong.
For, had there been any compilation like the Dasam Granth, these contemporary chroniclers could
never have failed to mention it. The first reference to some writings by the Tenth Guru is in Chhibbet’s
Bansavalinama written 71 years after the Guru’s demise. This volume, as assessed by scholars like Jaggi, Kohli
and others, has not been found to be very reliable as to its dates and other particulars. Besides, the author
himself says that he is no chronicler, but has based the writing merely on hearsay, and just as a matter of his
hobby: “I state what I had heard and what I could recollect.” “This hearsay I record just by way of my
hobby (shank). Thus, Chhibber himself discounts the historical accuracy of his statements, for, he claims to
belong only to the third generation of a Brahmin family whose head was a contemporary of the Tenth
Master.
Further, two important points have also to be kept in view. First, most Brahmin writers always have
a strong, natural and understandable bias to give a Brahminical colour to the Sikh religion and its history,
even though all the Sikh Gurus were emphatic to proclaim the independence of their system and the Panth.
The Fifth Master wrote :
“T keep not the Hindu fast, nor do I observe Muslim month of fast;
I serve only Him, who emancipates all; He is my Gosain;
He is my Allah; I have found release from the Hindus as from the Turks;
I visit not the pilgrim places of Hindus, nor go to Kaaba for Haj;
I serve only God, I serve not any other;
I worship not the Hindu way, nor say the Muslim prayers;
I bow to the one God within my heart;
Tam neither a Hindu, nor a Muslim;
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
For, my body and life belong to Him, Allah and Ram.”
Second, Guru Gobind Singh had put the final seal on this complete separateness, by the creation of
the Khalsa, the Nash Doctrine (Dharam Nash, Bharam Nash, Karam Nash, Sharam Nash and Janam Nash),
and the declaration of Guru Granth Sahib as the sole Ideological Guide and Living Guru of the Sikhs. Yet,
these writings have shown a subtle tendency to reshape and reframe Sikh events, so that these are accepted by
the gullible as a part of the Brahminical tradition.
Following is what Chhibber records : “The Guru got written a Granth (book) called ‘Samundar
Sagar.’ Later he got it thrown in a river.” “Later still he composed other writings.” “But, during the battles
at Anandpur, the leaves of these writings or packets (sauchian) were scattered to the wind and lost.”
Chhibber is vague about the contents or nature of these writings. Once he calls it “Samundar Sagar’, at
another time ‘Avtar Leela.’ There is no reference at all to ‘Dasam Grantl’, Bachittar Natak’, ‘Chandi Charitar’,
‘Chandi di Var’, ‘Charitropakhyan’ or ‘Chaubis Avtar’, as these are called now.
It is clear that it was peace time when the Guru had thrown the Samundar Sagar Granth in the river.
Could it ever happen that he would destroy Gurbani, his own or that of earlier Gurus, or anything of value to
Sikhs ? Gurbani has always been considered sacred, and been venerated more than even the Guru. Evidently,
the writings were such as could conveniently be discarded. The argument applies doubly to the packets that
were never completed or compiled, and were allowed to be scattered.
Thus, Chhibber’s story adds nothing to our knowledge about the Dasam Granth writings, their
compilation or loss. Therefore, the negative evidence of all contemporary chroniclers, coupled with the
evidence of Chhibber’s story, shows that till the end of the 18th century, there was nothing known about any
granth of the Tenth Guru, or any writings now regarded as its chapters or contents. In fact, the only granth or
compilation mentioned in the literature is “Vidya Sagar’ or ‘“Samundar Sagar Granth’, the contents of which
have no relation to the present Dasam Granth.
CHHIBBER’S STORY CONTRADICTED
Chhibber alleges three facts. First, that the Tenth Master initially created a granth called Samundar
Sagar, and had it thrown into a river. Later, some papers (sanchis) were prepared, but these, too, were
scattered to the wind and lost in the time of battles. Second, he records that in 1725 A.D. Bhai Mani Singh
compiled a granth combining the bani of Aad Granth and the writings that subsequently came to be called
Dasam Granth.’ For doing this mix-up, and thereby violating the prescribed sequence or method of writing
gurbani, a poor Sikh, when he saw the combined grant, cursed Bhai Sahib saying that just as he had disjointed
the garbani and mixed it up, he would also be cut to pieces.” Chhibber never writes chronologically. For
example, in a still later couplet No. 389, he writes that in 1698 A.D. Guru Gobind Singh rejected the
request of the Sikhs to combine the Aad Granth with his own writings.” It is very significant that the entire
book of Chhibber is packed with his use and narration of Brahminical practices, and stories of demons,
fairies, Hom, mantras, curses, etc., even though he knows that these are opposed to the doctrines in Guru
Granth Sahib. In short, his Brahminical faith and prejudices are glaringly evident.
In addition, the above version of Chhibber, we find, is contradicted both by Gian Singh and Sarup
Das Bhalla on all the essential points concerning Dasam Granth writings. Gian Singh never mentions that
Samundar Sagar Granth or sanchis of Avtar Leela stories were prepared, thrown or lost. He also contradicts
Chhibber that Sikhs at any time made a request to the Guru to combine his bani with the Aad Granth. All he
states is that once Sikhs requested the Guru to compile his own bani, but he categorically declined to do so,
saying that such a request should never be made again.” He also contradicts Chhibber’s version that Bhai
Mani Singh ever combined the two, and later suffered a ‘curse’ from a poor Sikh for doing so. He only states
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
that in response to a suggestion by some Sikhs, he wrote gurbani in separate words for the purpose of
explaining its meaning (/eeka), and that the sangat disapproved of it, saying that he would suffer for it. But the
sangat conceded that his faith in the Guru will remain unshaken. This satisfied Bhai Sahib.” However, he
indicates that on the request of Sikhs, he collected the bani of Guru Gobind Singh.”
Mehma Parkash of Sarup Das Bhalla, a late 18th century or an early 19th century production,
materially gives the same impression as does Gian Singh. Bhalla, a non-Brahmin, contradics all the three
assertions of Chhibber, namely, the preparation or loss of any granth like Samundar Sagar or sanchis of other
writings, the request of Sikhs to the Guru to add his bani to the Aad Granth, or any combined compilation by
Bhai Mani Singh, and the curse by a poor Sikh. On the other hand, Bhalla gives the story that the Guru got
ptepared a granth, since lost, called Vidya Sagar, which constituted translations of Sanskrit literature.” He
does not say that the Sikhs ever requested the Guru to include his bami in the Aad Granth, nor that Bhai
Sahib ever produced any such compilation.
These being the realities, there is little doubt that Chhibbet’s version is not only unworthy of reliance,
but is clearly the result of a prejudiced twist to facts as they really were. For, it is unthinkable that Bhai Sahib
would ever combine the two, as alleged by Chhibber and as now sought to be supported by the presence of
the Delhi and Sanerur birs, when he knew full well that the Guru had clearly frowned upon such an idea. Had
Bhai Sahib prepared any zr, itt would be the authentic version, and there could never have been the possibility
of such widely variant versions of the granth, as actually exist now. For, every bir would have been a copy of
it. Nor is there any reason for the complete disappearance of it. Because, we find, that the Delhi dir, which
has no history, is certainly not Bhai Sahib’s production.
For the reasons and facts given above there is little doubt that the story of Chhibber stands belied,
and that the version that Bhai Mani Singh compiled the Dasam Granth, is a distortion that has no historical,
ideological or factual basis or possibility.
19TH CENTURY
The existence of Dasam Granth is mentioned for the first time in mid-nineteenth century by Bhai
Santokh Singh, and later by Giani Gian Singh and others. Later, Bhai Kahn Singh and others repeat the story
of Bhai Santokh Singh, suggesting that the br of Dasam Granth was compiled by Bhai Mani Singh. It is also
stated that there were many objections to the compilation in one volume of the various writings that had
earlier existed separately. But, the final decision to do so or not, rested on the chance factor of the success or
otherwise of the mission of Sukha Singh and Mehtab Singh against Massa Ranghar. The reality, however, is
that none of these writers have given any shred of evidence to support the story of its compilation. In the
absence of any authentic historical evidence, it is simply impossible to attribute the present collection, or any
part of it, to Bhai Sahib. It is equally impossible to believe that if a respected contemporary of the Guru like
Bhai Sahib had really compiled the grant/, or any part of it, there could ever have been a controversy about it
among the Sikhs so as to require them to resort to the chance decision depending on the success of Mehtab
Singh and Sukha Singh. Bhai Mani Singh’s position being pre-eminent as a trusted scribe and devout Sikh of
the Guru, could any Sikh or Panth disregard or doubt his testimony about the Dasam Granth, if it had been
there ? There is, thus, little doubt that the story of Dasam Granth’s compilation by Bhai Sahib has no historical
basis. In fact, it is a motivated fabrication to give credence to the story of Dasam Granth compilation.
LETTER BY BHAI MANI SINGH
The supportive story of a letter written by Bhai Sahib, about the collection of Charitropakhyan, to
Mataji at Delhi is another fabrication. Dr Jaggi has examined in detail the veracity of this letter and found it
to be unreliable. The method of writing separate words, as in this letter, was not at all in vogue in the time of
Bhai Sahib. Nor is the practice visible in the contemporary manuscripts. The words or language used also
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
relates to a later period. Besides, the use of bindi, other features, matras and shape of letters are comparatively
modern. Very probably the letter is written by a metallic nib which was not available in those times. The
words used are rather unsophisticated and could not have been from a learned gurmukh like Bhai Sahib. It is
also strange that the letter mentions 303 charitars or stories, whereas everywhere else the number is 404."!
Nor has the letter been forthcoming from a natural custody. It was never heard of in the 18th or 19th
centuries, and its appearance is only a mid 20th century phenomenon. It is strange that Dr Ashta who
accepts it, has done so virtually without any examination of it. Charitropakhyan is a writing which no Sikh,
granthi, or scholar has been willing to read or send to his mother, sister or daughter. No one has so far read it
out in the open sangat. It is, indeed, unlikely that a gurmukh like Bhai Sahib would send its manuscript to
venerated Mataji. It is, thus, historically baseless to connect Bhai Sahib or Mataji in any manner with the
collection or compilation of Dasam Granth ot any patt of it.
The above rationale makes it plain that there is no evidence whatsoever of the existence of Dasam
Granth ot any part of it in the 18th or even the 19th century. All we now know is the later appearance of
some manuscripts or birs of the Dasam Granth. Four of them are regarded as the oldest. We shall consider
their reliability or authenticity.
BHAI MANI SINGH BIR
Raja Gulab Singh of Delhi purchased a bir in 1944-45, which is known as the Bhai Mani Singh Bir.
Nothing historically verifiable is known about it, except a story given by him that a soldier of Ranjit Singh
found or looted it during an attack on Multan in 1818 A.D. The soldier then shifted to and settled at
Hyderabad. How the Wr got to Multan and remained unknown for 125 years, is quite enigmatic and
unexplained. External evidence about its history is completely missing. The ris far from being a speaking
manuscript. For, the authorship is unknown, as also the place or time of its compilation. In a corner of a
page there is a slanting postscript, recording 1713 A.D. as the date of it. Jaggi’s examination and its
photocopy clearly show it to be a suspicious interpolation. The ink and writing of this entry are different
from those of the original bir. The handwriting and shape of letters are also comparatively crude. Its
: ‘ : : : : : 12 er : :
introduction in slanting lines in a corner proves its belated character.” In fact, it is a thoughtless fabrication
of the date. For, the story of Bhai Sahib’s collection of its parts and the Pantbic decision to have them in one
volume following Massa Ranghat’s death, relate to a time about two decades later.
All the internal evidence of the Jr is against its authenticity. Jaggi finds that the writer of the br does
not seem to be a good scribe or to have a good knowledge of the Gurmukhi script or the Punjabi language.”
Therefore, it is not at all possible to connect this bir with Bhai Sahib. On the other hand, the scribe is a
Hindi-knowing person who is distinctly interested in distorting the Sikh doctrines and mixing up Sikh
literature with Pwranic literature. And this is, exactly what he has done. The bir comprises both the dani of the
Gutus and that of the Dasam Granth. Gurbani has not been recorded as in Guru Granth Sahib, Le., raag-wise.
It is done Guru-wise and Bhagat Bani is mostly at the end of the combined volume. It shows conclusively that
the scribe is a non-Sikh who, without any knowledge of the prescribed method of writing Gurbani, is out to
do the heretical distortion of mixing-up dhur ki bani with Puranic myths about worship of dev7s and aviars. For,
no Sikh, and much less a garmukh like Bhai Sahib, could ever plan to combine the two and flout the sacred
sequence of Gurbani (written raag-wise) laid down by the Gurus. The shape of writing and its language
suggest that the distortion was done long after the demise of Bhai Sahib, when the Sikh world was engaged in
its life and death struggle with the Empire and the invaders.
Thus, the lack of any history of the manuscript for over 200 years, its internal evidence of
interpolation, shape of letters and language, together with the heretical change of method in writing Gurbani,
and its mix-up with Pwranic and avfar-worship literature, conclusively exclude the possibility of the Jr being a
production of Sikh quarters. On the other hand, the probability is that it is a compilation by those either
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
unconversant with Sikh doctrines, tradition and literature, or those out to confuse the Sikh ideology. In any
case, the manuscript has no historical or academic value as an authentic bir.
MOTI BAGH BIR
The lir of Moti Bagh is another manuscript that has no verifiable history. In 1959, one Natha Singh
stated that his ancestor, one Hakam Singh had given this br to Maharaja Mohinder Singh (1862-1876 A.D.),
that earlier one Nahar Singh had obtained it from Charat Singh, son of Sukha Singh, and that the former had
been obtaining for it a grant from Maharaja Ranjit Singh." But, no part of its history is verifiable, or is
otherwise corroborated. Nor is there anything in the internal evidence of the ir to support the story or any
part of it. The bir shows that it had been compiled by more than one person. Jaggi opines that the age of the
paper and the character of words and writing show that it could not have been compiled earlier than a
hundred years after the demise of the Tenth Guru.
SANGRUR BIR
The granthi at gurdwara Deodi Sahib Dewan Khara, Sangrur, says that in 1857 A.D. the dir had been
presented to the Raja by a Pathan of Delhi, when he had gone there in aid of the British. The dr was in two
parts, pages 1 to 600 contained Gurbani from Guru Granth Sahib, and pages 601 to 1166 the chapters that
form Dasam Granth. The first part stands lost. Its history before 1857 A.D. is unknown." Internal evidence
suggests that it is a combined collection of bani from Guru Granth Sahib and the chapters of Dasam Granth.
Since the very system of combining dbur ki bani with puranic and aviar and other literature is opposed to the
specific tradition laid down by the Gurus, the heretical mix-up has been done, as explained earlier, by non-
Sikh elements. For, it is inconceivable that a composition like the Charitropakhyan, which even the SGPC,
vide its letter No. 36672 dated 3.8.1972, has declared to be a composition from Hindu mythology and not by
the Tenth Master, could have been combined with sacred Gurbani by any Sikh. This fact alone shows
conclusively that the Dasam Granth, which contains Charitropakhyan, could never be a compilation of Sikh
quarters, much less could it be by the Tenth Guru. The vr, thus, is of no historical or academic value.
PATNA BIR
The Patna Bir has also no historical value. Nothing worthwhile about it was narrated to Jaggi when
he examined it there.'° The writing is simple, except that red ink has also been used. The arguments against
the authenticity of its compilation, production, and mix-up of the Tenth Gurus’s bani with Charitropakhyan, as
noted earlier, also apply to this volume. Jaggi feels that the condition of the paper, shape of letters, writing,
etc., suggest that it is a production of the 19th century.
NO BIR IS AUTHENTIC
Dr Jaggi’s detailed descriptions of these and other dirs shows that in matters of contents, number of
hymns and chbands, sequence of topics, list of writings, distribution of writings, or headings, etc., etc., there is
no uniformity between any two Uirs. In fact, some of these contain additional material clearly known to be
from non-Sikh sources. The conclusion is inevitable that these Jirs are odd, assorted and belated
compilations or collections of unconnected and disjointed materials, made by individuals from non-Sikh
quarters, who were neither conversant with the Sikh literature, nor with the method and sanctity of writing
Gurbani. Theit only interest was to mix-up Sikh literature with pwranic and avtar literature so as to show both
of them as parts of a single tradition. For, had the compilers been acquainted with Sikh practices and
quarters, there would not have been such a variation in contents, combinations, sequence, number of hymns,
as is evidenced by the different birs. Nor are these irs, for the same reasons, copies from one traceable or
authentic source. This conclusion is fortified by the facts that not only have these Jrs virtually no known
history, but the earlier ones relate to the period when struggle with the Empire was intense and there was a
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
ptice on every Sikh head. And, later when peace came, in the late 18th or early 19th century, these writings
containing mixed-up literature were quietly introduced and got copied without much scrutiny. Otherwise,
how could it be that no ir bears any authentic date or name of a known Sikh scribe of the Guru, of the early
Sikh period ? We also find that some of the errors are too gross to be committed by a person conversant with
Gurbani. Jagei has listed many of these errors in chapter six of his book. These errors and their repetition
show their non-Sikh origin. These are very significant aspects of the old compilations, and in any serious
assessment of their value, the importance of their import and implications cannot be ignored.
Here it is necessary to mention an unverified story that the Tenth Guru had initiated a move to
translate into Gurmukhi some ancient literature. It is well-known that in his short life he was faced with
colossal tasks, and his accomplishments, as declared by H.R. Gupta, were indeed superhuman in every field
of his activities : “His dreams and deeds brought a wonderful change in his own generation in the religious,
military and political life of the people. His personality was so fascinating, so bewitching, so dynamic, so
momentous and so unforgettable, that we are seized with wonder at the changes which took place in Punjab
within one year and half of his death. He was the greatest genius of his age. Whenever we touch that short
life, as he died at the age of forty two, we are at once brought into contact with a live wire. He was a meteor
that consumed itself to light the world. He was luminous like the sun and had conquered death. He
possessed a rare combination of so many excellences, supreme self-denial, marvellous intellect, superhuman
willpower, great heart and limitless energy ...... "7 Te is quite apparent that whatever translations were done by
Brahmins and Sikhs, were lost, and could not be suitably compiled or scrutinized about their utility in his time
or even later. In any case, there is no historical evidence to this effect. Very probably it is only the
Brahminical quarters who had later the time and interest to compile those translations and combine them
with Gurbani. This view, we feel, explains all aspects of the Dasam Granth and what Jaggi considers its
numerous inconsistencies and contradictions.
INTERNAL EVIDENCE
I. Historical Contradictions : There are, as detailed by Jaggi, many historical and other incongruities in
the Dasam Granth which it would be naive to attribute to the Tenth Guru. We give only two instances :
(i) In the story of Prithoo Raja, the author has shown that the legendary Shakuntala
had connection not with Prince Dushyant, but with the mythical Prithoo.
According to Bhagwat Puran, Prithoo was an avtar of Vishnu who appeared in Treta
Yug. But Shakuntala’s story of love with Dushyant in Bhagwat Puran is entirely
different.” Thus, the writer who has joined Prithoo and Shakuntala, could not be
concerned with the purity of Puranic stories. But his only interest appears to be to
link the bani of Guru Gobind Singh Sahib with concocted Hindu legends, so that he
is shown to be part of the Brahminical lore and legend.
(ii) Similarly, in the story of Raghu Raja, to say that Sanyasis regarded him as Dutt,
Yogis as Gorakh Nath, Bairagis as Ramanand, and Muslims as Prophet Mohammad,
shows that the interest of the story writer is not to narrate any rational history or
myth.” He only seeks to represent that the Guru accepted Hindu mythology and
tradition, and for the purpose to distort Sikh doctrines and ideas.
By no means can the authorship of such cock-and-bull stories be attributed to the lofty personality of
the Guru. Obviously, the interest of the authors of these incongruities is quite extraneous to any faithful
representation of events, doctrines, ideas, or even myths.
Another fact that seriously affects the historicity of these writings, is quite significant. Normally, the
preparation, compilation or reproduction of a granth by a scholar is a great achievement, and the same is kept
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
as a treasure, which the author or his family is always reluctant to part with. But, in the case of these
manuscripts or brs not only their history and names or identity of compilers are unknown, but, we also find,
that none of the compilers or custodians ever showed any reluctance to part with them. On the other hand,
an apparent aim seems to have been that the compilation reaches an important place or a distinguished
person, that could confer authenticity to it.
IL. Ideological Contradictions : The unity of spirit of all the Ten Gurus is a fundamental of Sikhism,
which stands emphasised and recorded in Guru Granth Sahib. The second basic and
unalterable concept of Sikhism, as opposed to that of Brahminism, is that God does not
incarnate. This concept is an integral element of the creedal hymn Mu/ Mantra’ of Guru
Nanak in the very beginning of Guru Granth Sahib. This concept is the corner-stone of
Sikh theology. So much so, that the Guru says : “May that mouth burn which says that
s 22 : i 23 %
God incarnate.” “God alone is the one who is not born of a woman.” “God is self-
‘ i F 24 - .
existent, without form and incarnates not.” The Gurus clearly deny belief in the theory of
incarnation of God. In order to dispel such ideas they state, “The Formless alone, Nanak, is
without fear, many are Ramas as the dust of His Feet, many Krishnas. Many are their stories
25
and many are the Vedas.” The Gurus write that He created countless Brahmas, Sivas and
Vishnus.
The above is the categoric thesis of the Gurus and Guru Granth Sahib, the sole Ideological Guide of
the Sikhs. We have to test any idea, doctrine or practice on the touchstone of Gurbani. For, it is
unimaginable that any Guru or Sikh could approve of anything incongruous with the creedal statement of
Guru Nanak. It is in the above context that we have to examine and test the authenticity of what is in any
granth, not specifically authenticated by the Gurus.
DEVI AND AVTAR WORSHIP IN THE DASAM GRANTH
Dr Jaggi has made a detailed examination of the issue. He finds that except for about 70 pages of the
Dasam Granth, including Jap Sabib, Swayyas, Akal Ustat (excluding hymns in praise of Durga), Asphotak Chhand
and Zaffarnama, the other contents which involve worship of avtars, devis and mahakal are mostly from the
Puranic \iterature. Following are some instances of deo? worship. (For details see chapter 9 of Jaggi’s book).
1) Tnibhangt Chhands (201-220, In Akal Usta?) are clearly in praise of the devi.
it) In Shashtarnama in the beginning there is a whole chapter (27 chhands) in praise of the
devi.
iit) Chandi Charitar 1 & I, Chaubis Avtar, Rudra Avtar including parts of Charitropakhyan,
all relate to the Puranic myths that are in praise of the dev? and aviars.
tv) Similarly, in the above Puranic stories there are numerous hymns in praise of Maha
Kal, who is a Tantric or Sakat deity, pages 55, 56, 57, 58, 73, 156, 157, 183, 185, 254,
310, 612, 613, 642, ete.
v) Worship of deo under the name of Kalika, Chandi, Siva or Durga is found at pages
74270, 995 117, 255,118, 509; 310,116, 6 19x675, ets fe,
vi) Apart from the Var of Durga, there is the entire Pwranic story of the devi coming to
the rescue of the mythical Indra and fighting battles with demon Maikhasur,
involving trillions of soldiers (dev? worship chhands and narration of the myth).
vil) In Chandi Charitar Ukat Bilas the author mentions that he has virtually made the
composition from 700 slokas of Markand Purana. He adds that whoever hears or
recites the same for any specific boon, the dev would certainly grant it
instantaneously (Chandi Charitar, Ukat Bilas - sloka 232).
(viit) = In Chandi Charitar I in the s/oka 261 the author writes that whoever remembers or
worships the de with devotion, shall attain salvation. Similarly, in the Durga Var
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
(x)
the author writes that whoever recites the same, will achieve salvation and not be
born again (stanza or pauri - 55).
Whether it is Rama Avtar, Parasnath Avtar, Krishna Avtar, Brahma Avtar, or the other
Puranic stories, these all relate to the worship to the devi and avtars.
Charitropakhyan, too, involves worship of the dev and Ka/ or Maha Kal (charitra 405,
chhands 52, 77, 126 and 132). The very facts that no Sikh is willing to read it in the
presence of women or the sangat, and that the S.G.P.C. has called it a Puranic myth
and not work of the Tenth Guru, show that it is no longer considered a part of the
Dasam Granth.
The above few instances prove that, apart from the about 70 pages or so, the writings in the Dasam
Granth positively accept and involve devi and aviar worship. Accordingly, these writings (Chandi Charitra and
Chandi Di Var - 126 pages, Chaubis Avtar - 744 pages, Brahm Rudra Avtar - 383 pages, Charitropakhyan and
Hikayat - 923 pages) are opposed to the doctrines of the Gurus and Guru Granth Sahib.
GURU GRANTH SAHIB ON DEVI AND AVTAR WORSHIP
About mythical writings and dev? and avfar worship Guru Granth Sahib records :
@)
(it)
(iii)
“OQ brother, fools worship gods and goddesses. They do not know that these
‘ ‘ i : «9920
imaginary deities can give nothing.
“The Vedas, Brahma, gods and goddesses know not His secrets, and have no
knowledge of the Creator.”
“The fools, the ignorant and the blind forget the Master Lord, and instead,
worship His slaves, the goddesses and Maya?”
GURU GOBIND SINGH ON DEVI WORSHIP
Hereunder we give the bani of the Tenth Guru as in the Aka/ Ustat:
(i)
(tt)
(itt)
(tv)
“There are millions of Indras and incarnations of Brahma, Vishnu and Krishna.
But, without worship of God none are accepted in His Court.” (stanza 38).
“Millions of Indras are servants at His door. Countless are the insignificant Shivas,
Ramas and Krishnas.” (stanza 40).
“Some worship Shiva (Mahadev); some say Vishnu is master of the universe, and
that by devotion to him, all calamities disappear. O, fool, think over a thousand
times and understand that at the last moment everyone will leave you in the lurch to
die alone. Remember only the One Lord who will never forsake you.” (ibid).
“There was a Shiva; he was gone, and there appeared another and he was gone too.
There are innumerable avfars like Rama or Krishna.” “Countless ate Brahmas,
Vishnus, Vedas, Puranas and Simritis that have come and gone.” (stanza 77).
These being the categoric hymns of Guru Granth Sahib and the clear statements of the Tenth Guru
himself, does it make any sense that he approved of or could ever have accepted any of the writings
mentioned earlier, which so clearly involve worship of devis and devias, and some of which faithfully reflect
and reproduce Puranic writings and myths in praise of avfars and the devis, suggesting faith in the efficacy of the
mantar system discarded by Guru Granth Sahib ?
CHANGING NAME OF THE GRANTH
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
There is another important factor suggesting that the major part of the Dasam Granth is actually taken
from some other sources, and has been mistakenly or deliberately combined with the bani of the Tenth Guru.
For example, the writings were originally all separate and unconnected pothis, or compilations. For that
reason these were first called ‘Dasam Patshah Ka Granth? This name does not suggest any authorship of the
Guru, but only seeks to link his name by way of reference to his period or quarters. Later, the granth was
called Dasam Granth and still later Sti Dasam Granth, and so on. The frequent changes in name only reflect the
interests of the writers or the publishers.
That this is a deliberate mix-up, is evident from the fact that originally most parts of the granth were
called Bachittar Natak Granth. This name appears 151 times in the Pwranic parts of the compilation. It is
repeated at the end of each composition, story, chapter or poem. This name appears 19 times in Rama Abtar,
67 times in Krishna Aptar, 33 times at the end of the stories of other _Avsars, etc.
The probability is that the mix-up has been done deliberately. For, Puranic verses, and chhands in
ptaise of de? are interpolated in the midst of what is clearly the bani of the Tenth Guru, as seen in the light of
Guru Granth Sahib. Similarly, some couplets, which are the bani of the Tenth Guru, as seen in the context of
Guru Granth Sahib, stand introduced in the midst of Pranic stories.
The bani in Guru Granth Sahib is the Sole Guru and Guide of every Sikh. It is the Light that alone
shows us the way to truth, especially when one may be wavering or in doubt. May we ask if there is any
objection to accepting what is clearly in consonance with it and avoiding what is admittedly, theologically and
logically, opposed to it ?
CONCLUSION
Our discussion makes it plain that such contents of the Dasam Granth as suggest worship of gods,
goddesses and aviars, are opposed to the doctrines of Sri Guru Granth Sahib and the Gurus. These are also
opposed to the unanimously accepted bani of Guru Gobind Singh, quoted above. By no stretch of reason
can it be suggested that those writings are consonant with the bani and doctrines of Guru Granth Sahib. On
the other hand, they clearly support the theory of avtarhood which the Gurus have emphatically rejected.
Purther, we find that there is not a shred of historical evidence to suggest that the Guru at any time approved
of it. In fact, he had thrown away or permitted to be scattered, whatever was not worth presentation. On the
other hand, Guru Granth Sahib was declared the Guru. Gurbani has been given to us to test what is valid or
true and what is unacceptable or spurious. That test is final and unalterable.
It is also evident that none of the dev? or avtar-worship writings are the collection of a Sikh or indicate
the authorship of a Sikh as the original scribe or compiler. On the other hand, the manner in which this mix-
up has been done, and the method of writing Gurbani laid down by the Gurus, grossly violated in the old dirs,
show that the author could not be a Sikh. Further, already the $.G.P.C. has accepted the position that 923
pages of Charitropakhyan ate Puranic myths, unconnected with the Guru.
Many outside scholars have clearly stated that in the absence of clarification of the position about the
Dasam Granth, the stand and history of the Tenth Guru cannot be clear. The oblique suggestion is that the
Tenth Guru brought the Panth into the Hindu fold, and drew inspiration from the Puranic past and the Shakti
cult, even though it is a historical fact that the hill princes, the staunch worshippers of the Shak# or devi cult,
not only opposed the Guru, but also voluntarily accepted the supremacy of the mighty Mughal instead of
confronting him. Another scholar, Ramji Lal, writes that Sikhs are Hindus, saying, “The Khalsa was
constituted to emancipate the Hindu society from the contemporary evils including idolatry, caste system,
superstition and ritualism.” “Again at that time among the disciples of the Great Guru Gobind Singh — Bhai
Nand Lal, Bhai Kanahya and Mohkam Chand, all were Hindus. Bhai Mati Das and Bhai Dayala who
sacrificed their lives along with Guru Tegh Bahadur, were also Hindus.” “Not only this, but Guru Gobind
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Singh himself revered Hindu Goddesses — Chandi and Durga and the Hindu avsars including — Sri Ram
Chander and Lord Krishna.”
While it is well-known that views of many scholars like Bhai Ardaman Singh of Bagrian, Dr Jaggi,
Shamsher Singh Ashok, Prof. Jagjit Singh, Principal Harbhajan Singh, Principal Jagjit Singh, Dr Rann Singh,
Sardar Harnam Singh, Maj. Gen. Narinder Singh, Sardar M.S. Marco, Bhai Ashok Singh and others are the
same as outs. Open attempts at ideological erosion, as quoted above, are being made. Hence the need of
academic clarification. For, no Sikh can accept that anything opposed to the categoric rejection of the
doctrine of avtarhoodin Guru Granth Sahib, could ever be from an authentic Sikh source, much less from the
Tenth Guru. It is undeniable that Guru Granth Sahib is our Living Guru, and its principles and doctrines are
out Sole Guide to test the veracity or acceptability of any idea, concept, writing, suggestion or activity.
REFERENCES
1. Chhibber, Kesar Singh : Bansavalinama, p. 1.
2 Guru Granth Sahib: p. 1136.
33 Chhibber, Kesar Singh: op. cit., p. 135.
4. Ibid., p. 136.
5: Ibid.
6. Ibid.
7. Gian Singh : Panth Prakash, p. 320.
8. Ibid., pp. 688-689.
9. Ibid., p. 321.
10. Bhalla, Sarupdas : Mebma Parkash, p. 794.
11. Jaggi, Rattan Singh : Dasam Granth da Karitartav, pp. 38-45.
12: Ibid., pp. 92-93.
13. Ibid.
14. Ibid., pp. 93-95.
15. Ibid., pp. 95-97.
16. Ibid., pp. 97-98.
LZ Gupta, H.R. : The Sikh Gurus, p. 245.
18. Jagei, Rattan Singh: op. cit., pp. 152-154.
19. Ibid., p. 152.
20. Ibid., p. 153.
21, Guru Granth Sahib : p. 1.
22. Ibid., p. 1136.
23. Ibid., p. 473.
24. Ibid., p. 547.
25. Ibid., pp. 464, 1156.
26. Ibid., p. 637.
27. Ibid., p. 894.
28. Ibid., p. 1138.
29. Geholt, N.S. : Politics of Communalism and Secularism, Deep and Deep Publications, New Delhi, 1993, p.
67.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
OUR CONTRIBUTORS
Dr AVTAR SINGH : Former Head, Department of Philosophy and Dean Academic Affairs,
Punjabi University, Patiala. A distinguished scholar and author of Eshics of The Sikhs, and many other
papers.
Justice CHOOR SINGH : Retired Judge of the Supreme Court of Singapore. Author of The Sikh
Gurus, Understanding Sikhism, and a monograph on Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale.
Sardar DALJEET SINGH : Author of Sikhism — A Comparative Study of Its Theology And Mysticism,
The Sikh Ideology, Authenticity of Kartarpuri Bir and Essentials of Sikhism. Delivered Guru Nanak Dev
Memorial Lectures, and Guru Tegh Bahadur Commemorative Lectures, at Punjabi University,
Patiala; Contributor of several papers on Sikhism.
Dr GANDA SINGH: Ph.D., D.Litt., Well-known Sikh Historian and Research Scholar. Author of
more than 50 books and over 175 papers in English, Urdu, Punjabi and Hindi.
Dr GOBIND SINGH MANSUKHANTI : Author of Introduction to Sikhism, Guru Gobind Singh, Life of
Guru Nanak Dev, and other books on Sikhism.
Dr GURDARSHAN SINGH DHILLON : Chairman, Department of Evening Classes, Panjab
University, Chandigarh. Author of Researches in Sikh Religion and History, India Commits Suicide, and
Perspectives on Sikh Religion and History. Is also the author of several research papers on Sikh History;
Specialist in the Singh Sabha period.
Sardar GURTE] SINGH : National Professor of Sikhism. Author of Tanda of the Centaur: Sikhs
and Indian Secularism and several papers on Sikh Religion and History.
Professor HARBANS SINGH : Editor-in-Chief of The Encyclopaedia of Sikhism, Panjabi University,
Patiala. His publications include The Heritage of the Sikhs, Guru Nanak and Origin of the Sikh Faith, Guru
Gobind Singh, Aspects of Punjabi Literature and Bhai Vir Singh.
Dr HARI RAM GUPTA : Ph.D., D.Litt., Retired as Professor and Head of the Department of
History, Panjab University, Chandigarh. Author of thirteen research volumes on the history of Sikhs
and Punjab and a large number of papers and monograms. Honorary Head of the Post-graduate
Department of History at Dev Samaj College for Women, Firozpur (Punjab).
Dr HARNAM SINGH SHAN : Formerly Professor and Head, Department of Guru Nanak Studies,
Panjab University, Chandigarh. A known scholar of Sikhism, and author of many books on Sikh
religion.
Sirdar KAPUR SINGH : Erudite Sikh scholar, author of Parasaraprasna, Sikhism: An O0ccumenical
Refigion and several other books and research papets.
Sardar KARNAIL SINGH: A scholar of Sikh history, known for his book Aglo-Sikh Wars.
Dr KHARAK SINGH : Secretary, Institute of Sikh Studies, Chandigarh. Author of several research
papers on Sikh Studies. Editor of Abstracts of Sikh Studies, and several books.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Sardar JAGJIT SINGH: Author of The Sikh Revolution, Perspectives on Sikh Studies and In The Caravan
of Revolutions, besides other books and publications on Sikh Studies.
Dr NOEL Q. KING : Prof. Emeritus of Religion, University of California, Santa Cruz (U.S.A,).
Author of several books on religion, and papers on Sikh Studies.
Dr JAMES R. LEWIS : Prof. of Philosophy and Religion, Appalachian State University, Boone,
North Carolina, (U.S.A.). Author of several papers on religion and Sikh Studies.
Sardar THARAM SINGH : Retired Secondary Principal, Singapore. Wrote The Story Of The Sikhs
for Singapore school-children.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
GLOSSARY
AAD/ADI: First, original, e.g., Adi Granth, the original Sikh scripture.
AHIMSA : Hindu religious doctrine of non-injury.
AKAL: Eternal; immortal; a term used to describe God.
AKAL BUNGA : Lord’s mansion; another name for Akal Takht.
AKALI: Worshipper of the Eternal God; usually refers to members of the Shiromani Akali Dal —
a political party of the Sikhs.
AKALI DAL: Corps of volunteers originally organised for wresting control of gurdwaras from the
corrupt Hindu mabants. Now a political party.
AKAL TAKHT : The throne of the Almighty, the highest seat of authority of the Sikh religion; the
building erected by Guru Hargobind opposite the Golden Temple.
AMRITDHARI KHALSA : One who has been initiated as a Khalsa.
ARDAS : An important Sikh prayer recited at the conclusion of a service; the word itself means
supplication; Petition to God invoking His Grace.
AVTAR : Incarnation of a deity, usually Vishnu.
BAISAKHI: See Vaisakhi.
BANI: See Gurbani.
BHAGAT/BHAKTA : Saint; exponent of bhakti; devotee who adores God.
BHAKTI: Devotion, worship, meditation, religious obervances.
BIR: Volume of Guru Granth Sahib.
CHARHDI KALA : The waxing mood; ever rising high spirits.
DARBAR SAHIB: The Lord’s Court; used as a synonym for the Golden Temple, the Hartmandar.
DASAM GRANTH : Lit. Tenth Book. An anthology of 1422 pages, compiled some two decades
after the passing away of Guru Gobind Singh. Besides a few hymns of the Guru, the
compilation includes contributions of a number of poets of his times.
DASWANDH : Tithe or one tenth of one’s income; contribution towards common socio-religious
development of society.
DHARAM KHAND : A hymn in the Japy Sabib of Guru Nanak. It gives the description of the
earth, our planet, which according to the Guru, is the place for the practice of
righteousness.
DHARMA : Righteousness; moral law.
DHARAMSAL : Hostel for pilgrims; sometimes used as Prayer Hall. Literally, a place for righteous
actions.
DIVALI : Festival of lights celebrated by the Hindus. Sikhs celebrate it as the day on which Guru
Hargobind, after release from prison, arrived at Amritsar.
GADDI: Throne of Guruship.
GRANTHI: One who recites from Guru Granth Sahib. Frequently he may look after the gurdwara
also, but he is not a priest. There is no priest class among Sikhs.
GURBANI (OR BAND : The Revealed Word; the utterances of the Gurus and bhagats recorded in
the Adi Granth; the Divine word received from God. See Gurshabad.
GURDWARA : Literally, “Door of the Gurw’; a building that houses the sacred Sikh scripture.
GURMATTA : The intention, resolution or will of the Guru expressed in a formal decision made by
a representative assembly of Sikhs; a resolution of the Sarbat Khalsa.
GURMUKH: See Sachiara.
GURMUKHI : The script in which Guru Granth Sahib is written. Literally, “from the mouth of the
Guru’.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
GURSHABAD : The divine word of the Guru; hymns from the sacred scripture of the Sikhs —
Guru Granth Sahib.
GURU GRANTH SAHIB : The Adi Granth, the sacred scripture of the Sikhs on which Guruship
was conferred by Guru Gobind Singh after adding the hymns of his father, Guru Tegh
Bahadur.
GURU PANTH : The corporate Guru of the Sikhs.
GURU KA LANGAR: “The Guru’s Mess;” food served from the community kitchen of a
gurdwatra.
HAUMAIN : Self-exaltation; self-centredness; ego.
HUKM (OR RAZA) : Divine Order; Command of God; Will of God.
JATHEDAR : Leader of a Jatha (contingent of Sikhs) : Chief or Head, e.g., Jathedar of the Akal
Takht.
KACHI: Literally unripe; false; apocryphal.
KAKKAS : The five symbols enjoined on Sikhs, viz., achh (breeches), Rara (steel bangle) Azrpan
(sword), Aangha (comb) and esh (hair).
KHALSA DAL: The army of initiated Sikhs, the Khalsa; term used during the 18th century.
KHALSA PANTH : In the time of the Gurus, the Sikh Panth was a religious community. After the
creation of the Khalsa by Guru Gobind Singh, the Khalsa became rulers of North India
and the Khalsa Panth became the Sikh nation.
KIRPAN : Sabre which a Khalsa when initiated is enjoined to carry on his/her person always.
KIRTAN : Devotional singing in praise of deity.
LAKH: One hundred thousand, 100,000.
LANGAR : See Guru ka Langar.
MAHANT : Head of a Hindu mandir (temple)
MANJIS : 22 seats of religious authority (wanjis) were established by Guru Amar Das, but abolished
by Guru Gobind Singh because they had become corrupt.
MANMUKH : Guided by one’s own mind, rather than by the Guru’s advice; self-oriented,
irreligious.
MIRI-PIRI : The Sikh doctrine of whole-life religion or complementarity and inseparability of
spiritual and temporal aspects of life.
MISLS : Sikh confederacies in the eighteenth century which later consolidated to form the Sikh
nation ruled by Ranjit Singh.
MITHYA : Illusion; Hindu doctrine that this earth is a place of suffering.
MOHURS : Former Indian gold coins.
MOKSHA : Return of the soul for merger in Brahman, or a state of bliss and union with God,
without involvement in the world of man; Hindu doctrine of liberation in this life.
MORCHAS : Resistance or confrontation by unarmed Jathas (contingents) of Sikhs to wrest control
of gurdwaras from corrupt Hindu mabants; anti-government agitation.
MUKTI: Liberation; salvation; end of transmigration of soul and its union with God.
MUL MANTRA : The basic belief or the fundamental doctrine of the Sikh faith enunciated by Guru
Nanak in Japji Sabib, the opening words of Guru Granth Sahib.
NAM, NAAM : God and Naam are Real, Eternal and Unfathomable. Naam may be called the
immanent or the qualitative aspect of God, working and directing the manifest world
described by the Sikh Gurus as unmanifest (wrewna) and manifest (sarguna); the Highest
Power, creating, informing, supporting and working the entire universe. Sikhs pray for
the boon of Naam, 1.e., linkage with God.
NAMSIMRAN : The daily worship or remembrance of God which Sikhs are enjoined to do.
NANAKPANTHIS : Guru Nanak’s disciples. Before the creation of Khalsa, Sikhs were known as
Nanakpanthis.
NIRGUNA SAMPRADAYA : The Sant tradition of Nothern India; a sect of Hinduism.
NIRVAN, NIRVANA : Liberation, salvation, redemption, Buddhist term for mukit.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
PANGAT : A line of devotees sitting on the floor for a meal from the Guru’s kitchen attached to
every gurdwatra.
PANJ PIARAS : Literally ‘Five Beloveds’; the term originally used for the five Sikhs who offered to
sacrifice their heads on a call from Guru Gobind Singh on the Vaisakhi day in 1699.
Currently used to refer to five Sikhs chosen to represent the community.
PANTH : Literally path or way; Sikh Panth means the entire community following the Sikh way of
life.
PARSAD : Kindness, grace, favour. Karah prasad is consecrated pudding distributed in a gurdwara,
symbolising the Guru’s kindness.
PATASHAHTI : Political sovereignty.
POTHI: Book, granth.
PUJARI: A Hindu priest.
RAGIS : Hymn-singers who perform &7rfan, the singing of devotional songs and hymns from Guru
Granth Sahib.
RAHIT MARYADA : Disciplinary Code of the Khalsa issued by the Shiromani Gurdwara
Parbandhak Committee.
RAHITNAMA : Book containing the original disciplinary Code of the Khalsa. There are several
published in the eighteenth century.
RAJ JAATI: People of royal lineage; people destined to rule.
RAJ KAREGA KHALSA : The Khalsa shall rule.
RAZA: See Hukm.
SACHI: True.
SACH ACHAR : Truthful living enjoined by the Sikh Gurus.
SACHIARA (or GURMUKH) : One who lives truthfully; God-conscious man.
SAMSARA: The world, universe, the creation as a whole; mundane existence.
SANGAT : A Sikh gathering; assembly; congregation.
SANT MAT : Sant tradition of Nothern India; a sect of Hinduism.
SANT SIPAHI (or SAINT-SOLDIER) : Who is prepared to fight for justice or a noble cause as an
expression of his devotion to God.
SARBAT DA BHALA : Welfare of all; peace and prosperity for all.
SARBAT KHALSA : An assembly of all the Khalsa. In the eighteenth century, the /zs/s used to
hold Sarbat Khalsa meetings.
SATGURU : Lit. true Guru; Eternal Guru or God; frequently used for the Sikh Gurus.
SAWAIYA : Religious text; panegyric; an eulogy; laudation, a form of poetry.
SEVADAR: Attendant.
SHABAD : Divine Word of the Gurus received from God; refers to the sacred word appearing in
Guru Granth Sahib.
SHAKTI: Power; strength; might; energy; authority.
VAISAKHI : The harvest season festival observed on 13th April each year. It is also the day on
which Guru Gobind Singh initiated the Sikhs as the Khalsa.
VARNA DHARMA : The Hindu caste system, which divides human beings into four major castes,
based on the principle of inequality of human beings.
ZULUM : Persecution; tyranny; torture.
Sri Satguru Jagjit Singh Ji ELibrary NamdhariElibrary@gmail.com
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11